McCarthy admits he does not have backing of Cork hurlers

[dowling]

He owed Frank, simple as. The same shite happens everyday everywhere. Hell, just last week I called in a favour from a lad I used to work with.

He didn't owe Frank, he was an amateur volunteer giving up his free time to do a job for his club and he was slightly late with registering one team and Frank then used this to try and force the club to vote his way on some issue. Comparing the GAA to world democracies is nonsense but as GAA says to accept corruption of democracy in the GAA and oppose players trying to go above that corruption is a baffling point of view.

You'd prefer what exactly ? A benevolent dictator or perhaps you'd like to give good old facism a go ?

How about a GAA where paid employees do their job without fear or favour?

If Franks evil and dictatorial then we are living in a tyrannical dictatorship

I don't think anyone but yourself said he is evil, but if he is using leverage to force clubs to vote as he wants him then he is certainly tyrannical.

The laughable thing is pro-CB posters (which you aren't one Sligeach) are flip flopping now on why they oppose the players, they spent the first 150 odd pages going on about the democratic process and clubs having their say and now they are agreeing with your analysis that the demoxcratic process is actually flawed, which pro-player posters argued since the start, but that it doesn't matter because that is they way of the world!!

Of course it matters, at least inpolitics if a politician was found out not to be representing the views of his constituents they'd have the opportunity to turf him out every four years, they don't get that with Frank.

Drive her into the ground and to hell with the consequences - as one pro player poster on here has already said, it has to get really, really bad before it starts to get better. Just like it had to take 3500 people dead etc etc in order to being peace to the North ( or so they told us ).

What's with all the IRA/troubles analogies?

Zulu there's no flip flopping going on. The point was made that there were other avenues the 2008 panel could have taken but quite clearly decided those avenues which by and large the rest of us use weren't for them.

[The GAA]

Zulu there's no flip flopping going on. The point was made that there were other avenues the 2008 panel could have taken but quite clearly decided those avenues which by and large the rest of us use weren't for them.

I know this is a point that has been made before but it is the one that divides the sides on this particular issue:

There's no way the players would have gotten anywhere with the avenues you suggest until they had convinced the ordinary GAA members in the county that they were serious and that they'd have to get off their asses

[orangeman]

The strikers did bet on it going this far IMO, they knew the CB and were willing to go all the way. There was no room for compromise and there never was, had the players gone to the clubs while still playing nothing would have been achieved, that is human nature, things have to get very bad before most people not directly involved will engage in any issue. Anyway this is CP's propsal taken from AFR website.




Apologies GAA - This is what I was referring to.

Did you not say that the democratic route wouldn't have worked a few months ago ?

[orangeman]

Compromise is always the better option but sometimes there is no common ground on which to base a compromise. Anyway the troubles and the Cork situation are clearly different in a multitude of ways so to compare them repeatedly is nonsense. The players can't play for Gerald, they don't rate him, had a poor relationship with him prior to this and it has worsend considerably since then so any solution invoving Gerald staying as manager will not work. Anyone who doesn't accept that has never played sport and at this stage the worst solution for Cork would be a compromise that involves Gerald and the 08 panel going forward together.

Time was the Brits and the Provos were literally murdering each other - time was Paisleyites wouldn't have even shared the same building as the Shinners.

Timing is everything in life. It's not as clear cut as you think it is.

[orangeman]

Zulu there's no flip flopping going on. The point was made that there were other avenues the 2008 panel could have taken but quite clearly decided those avenues which by and large the rest of us use weren't for them.

I know this is a point that has been made before but it is the one that divides the sides on this particular issue:

There's no way the players would have gotten anywhere with the avenues you suggest until they had convinced the ordinary GAA members in the county that they were serious and that they'd have to get off their asses

In the same way that it took the players some time tocatch on that Gerald was also every bit as serious. Had Gerald cleared off, we wouldn't be at this juncture. The staus quo would have remained.

[dowling]

Zulu there's no flip flopping going on. The point was made that there were other avenues the 2008 panel could have taken but quite clearly decided those avenues which by and large the rest of us use weren't for them.

I know this is a point that has been made before but it is the one that divides the sides on this particular issue:

There's no way the players would have gotten anywhere with the avenues you suggest until they had convinced the ordinary GAA members in the county that they were serious and that they'd have to get off their asses

What could have happened is something we disagree on but I was making my point in relation to Zulu saying anti-strike posters are changing their stance on the panel's present action of trying to go through clubs. I don't recall anyone saying there was a perfect democratic process to resolve this situ by.
The panel can do what they like now, try to use clubs or hold protests, but they're still putting themselves outside the processes the rest of us must use and are mindless of the consequences.

[The GAA]

I don't see how they are pting themselves outside the processes available to the rest of us. You or I can stop playing / working / volunteering for our club any time we like. there may not be much of a clamour to get either of us back but that's a privileged position that these players have earned in people's hearts and you and i have not

[The GAA]

Quinn exits with parting shot at Cork Board over deadlock


By Cliona Foley


Friday February 27 2009

CORK'S striking players and rebel clubs got support from an unlikely but significant source last night when the outgoing Connacht GAA President Lauri Quinn spoke up in their defence.

And the Gaelic Players Association (GPA) also got a boost from Quinn's departing address to the Connacht Convention when he said the unofficial players' union should be officially recognised by the GAA.

"At last year's Convention I spoke about a stand-off in Cork. It is regrettable that a difficult situation has arisen again," Quinn said.

"Like in most arguments there is right and wrong on both sides and I would be confident that a resolution will be found in the coming weeks."

And, significantly, given the recent developments in Cork and the manner in which so many clubs have rallied around the players, Quinn also stressed that "County Boards have a duty to look after the needs of the players, including the club players. A structured schedule of games for clubs should be paramount when counties are drafting their fixtures programme".

Quinn also signed off with an unusually strongly-worded declaration of support for the GPA which has been battling with the GAA for some time for official recognition.

Ideals

"Talks are continuing with the GPA concerning formal recognition," Quinn said. "I would welcome such an agreement provided that the aims and ideals of Cumann Luthchleas Gael are enshrined in it and that players have the option of remaining outside of the GPA if that is their wish."

Earlier this week GPA chief Dessie Farrell suggested that recognition for the players' body could be central to creating "greater harmony" between players and County Boards and help prevent situations like the Cork strike.

But he admitted that time is running out for that recognition to be finalised on President Nickey Brennan's watch, as the GPA had hoped.

Brennan has declared a notional support for recognising the players' body as long as the GAA is happy with the final terms. But Brennan also admitted: "there are stumbling blocks. I believe we have made progress and the next few weeks will be crucial."

"It is getting close to decision time on both sides," Farrell said. "The ambition would have been to try and have something in place by Congress before Nickey's term in office ends."

Meanwhile, in the Cork strike, county chairman Jerry O'Sullivan has denied suggestions that the County Board is gearing up to use the county football development squad to replace their senior footballers for the Munster SF championship, if the footballers withdraw their services, as threatened, at the end of the National League.

"There is no ulterior motive, these development squads have been in existence for many years, since my own time as coaching officer with the board," O'Sullivan said.

Cork's senior football team are currently in Portugal for a spell of warm-weather training.

- Cliona Foley

http://www.independent.ie/sport/hurling/quinn-exits-with-parting-shot-at-cork-board-over-deadlock-1655571.html

[heffo]

I re-read Brian Corcoran's biography this week and he is effusive of his praise for Frank Murphy

[The GAA]

In general or on something specific?

[Zulu]

The strikers did bet on it going this far IMO, they knew the CB and were willing to go all the way. There was no room for compromise and there never was, had the players gone to the clubs while still playing nothing would have been achieved, that is human nature, things have to get very bad before most people not directly involved will engage in any issue. Anyway this is CP's propsal taken from AFR website.




Apologies GAA - This is what I was referring to.

Did you not say that the democratic route wouldn't have worked a few months ago ?

As usual you've twisted a quote to try and suit your argument, it is clear from the above quote that I didn't say what you implied I said.

What could have happened is something we disagree on but I was making my point in relation to Zulu saying anti-strike posters are changing their stance on the panel's present action of trying to go through clubs. I don't recall anyone saying there was a perfect democratic process to resolve this situ by.

You have flip flopped dowling, you argued that the players should have gone through the democratic process, we argued that by doing so they would have being going through a flawed process that was stacked against them and very often that process didn't represent the views of the GAA club member. Now you,OM and Sligeach agree that the process is flawed but that that is the way of things, so if you think that how can you oppose the players using an alternative tactic, especially when everyone agrees that Gerald was appointed only to antagonize the players and not for the good of Cork GAA.

[heffo]

In general or on something specific?

Allow me the liberty of paraphrasing:

"Frank called me up to his office to give me a lecture for lining out for my club when it was against IC player policy at the time. He was all set to lift me out of it but I stood up to him and we never had a problem since that day. I think he's great and great for Cork. I can't tell you the amount of time he's gotten Cork players out of trouble with his knowledge of the rule book and quick thinking. He once gave us an unscripted ten minute speech which raised the hairs on the back of our neck. If I were ever in trouble in court, Frank would be the first man I'd call. There is a great picture of me, Frank (and someone else) arm in arm after (I think 2004 AI final). Maybe we'll have more days like that some time in the future.'

[dowling]

Quote from: dowling on January 24, 2009, 11:01:34 PM

I have to admit that, as a first time poster, I was somewhat fearful of getting into this debate after 140 odd pages and some passionate comments. So I did try to keep my comments measured and diplomatic. And to be fair I've met with a fairly moderate response.
Now I wouldn't be into pasting what was previously posted - indeed I don't know why it's done here but so be it -and neither would I be into highlighting posts in red but I do think posters who have taken my comments to task have read what they perceived to be written rather than what I wrote.


"Firstly I didn't give anyone any shit about democracy, I don't even vaguely recall anything close to it. But being vague leaves you open to correction anyway so I try to be definite and when I'm not sure I'll ask for relevant information. And for what it's worth I don't believe there's any such thing as democracy in practise, only how people decide to interpret and implement their theory of it as it suits them. So in the same way that county board members ruling with an iron fist for example aren't democratic neither is a few players cajoling a group of players to behave in a certain way."


But of course players as amateur athletes don't have to accept anything. What do they have to accept though?
I know counties work differently but what I find hard to understand is why a county board would be put in place by club delegates to act on the clubs' and county's behalf and then be expected to have the delegates to get club approval on decisions the board might take. It's even confusing writing that.
Maybe the Cork board aren't any board and maybe everything isn't black and white but to be honest all counties have similar problems, although maybe not as intense, and similar personality issues.
Most posters against the players' action have given praise to the players for their commitment and various qualities on and off the field but the anti board posters have lacked any praise in their comments. So as an outsider am I to believe this county board and those who have served on it in the past and are maybe still on it have given nothing positive to Cork hurling?
As for the GPA element of my post, how could they not be involved? A dispute with the players and the players' body not involved? How could they not be?
But thanks for the welcome, I'm a bit rushed but hope you get my points as I meant them.



"Firstly I didn't give anyone any shit about democracy, I don't even vaguely recall anything close to it. But being vague leaves you open to correction anyway so I try to be definite and when I'm not sure I'll ask for relevant information. And for what it's worth I don't believe there's any such thing as democracy in practise, only how people decide to interpret and implement their theory of it as it suits them. So in the same way that county board members ruling with an iron fist for example aren't democratic neither is a few players cajoling a group of players to behave in a certain way."

That's always been my position Zulu.

Of course it's difficult to go through the procedures that have been put in place by the membership and hope to get a result but what's the alternative for the rest of us. Members use means which test the procedures in clubs all the time and quite often it can cause division.
The problem isn't about the panel's actions as such it's about the conseqeunces which those actions will create. The panel obviously thought it would be short and sharp but it has turned out differently. Those who believe the panel knew this would be a long haul are not reading this right.
If you read the posts properly basically most are saying they wouldn't have had the same problem with the panel if they used the system that the membership put in place and which the rest of the membership use. Didn't mean they were going to agree with their demands but posters knew what could come of this and hence posters have referred to the 'nuclear option', an explosive situation and that's what it has turned out to be.
The only reason the panel are trying to use the clubs now is because they have been forced into that route.
And their contempt for procedure is obvious in the fact that they don't even know what procedures they can use or how to use them.

[The GAA]

Of course it's difficult to go through the procedures that have been put in place by the membership and hope to get a result but what's the alternative for the rest of us. Members use means which test the procedures in clubs all the time and quite often it can cause division.
The problem isn't about the panel's actions as such it's about the conseqeunces which those actions will create. The panel obviously thought it would be short and sharp but it has turned out differently. Those who believe the panel knew this would be a long haul are not reading this right.
If you read the posts properly basically most are saying they wouldn't have had the same problem with the panel if they used the system that the membership put in place and which the rest of the membership use. Didn't mean they were going to agree with their demands but posters knew what could come of this and hence posters have referred to the 'nuclear option', an explosive situation and that's what it has turned out to be.
The only reason the panel are trying to use the clubs now is because they have been forced into that route.
And their contempt for procedure is obvious in the fact that they don't even know what procedures they can use or how to use them.

I fundamentally disagree with your presumption that they thought this would be over quickly. i believe they knew they'd have to come this far and i think a lot of them fully expect not to hurl for cork this year.

I don't now how you arrived at the conclusion that the players are a bungling group with no foresight or planning to what they do. They knew motions through the clubs woud not work last november because there was no incentive for club members to get involved. now, with the football and hurling championships about to disappear for cork, members have engaged with their clubs and will ensure that this route is effective as possible - whether that is effective enough remains to be seen.

[dowling]

Of course it's difficult to go through the procedures that have been put in place by the membership and hope to get a result but what's the alternative for the rest of us. Members use means which test the procedures in clubs all the time and quite often it can cause division.
The problem isn't about the panel's actions as such it's about the conseqeunces which those actions will create. The panel obviously thought it would be short and sharp but it has turned out differently. Those who believe the panel knew this would be a long haul are not reading this right.
If you read the posts properly basically most are saying they wouldn't have had the same problem with the panel if they used the system that the membership put in place and which the rest of the membership use. Didn't mean they were going to agree with their demands but posters knew what could come of this and hence posters have referred to the 'nuclear option', an explosive situation and that's what it has turned out to be.
The only reason the panel are trying to use the clubs now is because they have been forced into that route.
And their contempt for procedure is obvious in the fact that they don't even know what procedures they can use or how to use them.

I fundamentally disagree with your presumption that they thought this would be over quickly. i believe they knew they'd have to come this far and i think a lot of them fully expect not to hurl for cork this year.

I don't now how you arrived at the conclusion that the players are a bungling group with no foresight or planning to what they do. They knew motions through the clubs woud not work last november because there was no incentive for club members to get involved. now, with the football and hurling championships about to disappear for cork, members have engaged with their clubs and will ensure that this route is effective as possible - whether that is effective enough remains to be seen.

But what evidence leads you to believe the 2008 panel planned for where they are now and were prepared to be here.

Fair enough GAA but there are no signs that the panel's actions have been coherent and structured and for most of the time they have been on the back foot. Indeed all along all they have really been able to do is to try and increase disruption and repeat their mantra, this is for the good of Cork, and hope people buy into it.
The latest indication that they haven't planned is that they asked delegates at their meeting to do something procedurally which can't be done. You would think that at the very least they would have looked into something they're asking others to do.
Some of them might have reckoned on not playing again this year but my belief is they thought this would be over quite quickly and didn't legislate for strong opposition.
The only aspect I believe has been planned, and you won't like me for this, is that the GPA, while no doubt involved, have kept a low profile. Although it's beginning to surface more and more as time and the dispute goes on.
The panel is showing signs of planning now but up to this point nothing indicates that.
And just to re-iterate or repeat if you like, there is no evidence to show that the majority of clubs are supportive of the strikers' actions or will do their bidding for them.
That's my analysis. It doesn't matter now in the bigger picture but I hope I'm right, not because I could feel smug about myself, but one of the reasons is because I would hate to think that some of these players who have got so much from the GAA would intentionally bring Cork and the wider GAA to where it is. I do believe they've got carried away with the situation and their own importance and don't know to let go or even how to let go.

GAA you believe they knew they had to come this far, but how much further will they be prepared to go and what price are they prepared to have Cork GAA  pay to win their strike? And how much further do you think they should go? And is there a point at which you would stop supporting them? For instance if a row broke out at the next protest at the football match between people of opposing views is that acceptable, a price that has to be paid? And don't rule it out happening. Although there would probably be more chance of it happening at a hurling match and hence the reason to pick the football.
So if Croke don't resolve it, the clubs don't resolve it where does it