McCarthy admits he does not have backing of Cork hurlers

[Zulu]

Ah Jesus Zulu sure my post might only have been tongue in cheek also.

Well I hope so because aspects of it couldn't be taken seriously.

It's a bit rich to accuse me of being aggressive because I put on one post of exagerated language to make a point. I have faced plenty of aggression here.
And back to the 'grow up' because I point out the constant use of 'mildly colourful language'. The use of such language is aggressive in that consciously or sub-consciously it's an attempt to belittle the poster rather than address the post. It's use doesn't 'debate the issue'.

Your post was a bit agressive but it doesn't bother me in the slightest, unfortunately you constantly take offence to the mildest of rebuke's, you posted one or two things that were definitly factually wrong so i termed them 'rubbish', which IMO they were. Spare me the psyco-babble about unconsciously belittleing the poster, I'm just disagreeing with your opinion.

I have no ulterior motive to be on here other than personally I disagree with what the 2008 panel have done and believe it to be detrimental to Cork and the GAA in general. And I also believe the basis of the strike was an attempt to bully Gerald McCarthy as Teddy Holland was bullied last year.

Fair enough and finally you explain why you hold the position you do, I agree that you can interpret the players actions to be bullying however I feel that it was the CB who attempted to bully the players first. The players used the only means at their disposal to 'return fire' so to speak.

I'd like to manage a county team some day and I will have paid my dues by the time I feel I'll be capable of doing the job but if the players of a particular county can't stand me then the CB shouldn't appoint me, because i won't be able to do the job. And if I ever thought that the players of a particular team didn't want me then I'd refuse the post regardless of the 'democratic process' because I wouldn't enjoy it and I couldn't have success. That the CB reappointed Gerald and that he accepted raises huge questions over their motivations and therefore IMO justifies the players stance.

[Reillers]

Tbh if we need to see strikes and aggro in other counties then so be it IMO, however I'm not sure any other county is as bad as Cork in this regard. Nevertheless a lot of CB's could do with a shake up and this is clearly evidenced by the club fixtures in many counties.

That is quite clearly advocating strikes Zulu irrespective of what you say about badly expressing yourself.

You're taking it out of context AGAIN. There's another part after it that justifies it. But no you ignore it and highlight a bit that somehow in your view backs your arguement.
Either reply propperly or stop wasting our time with irrelevant out of context posts that make no sense.

[Zulu]

Tbh if we need to see strikes and aggro in other counties then so be it IMO, however I'm not sure any other county is as bad as Cork in this regard. Nevertheless a lot of CB's could do with a shake up and this is clearly evidenced by the club fixtures in many counties.

That is quite clearly advocating strikes Zulu irrespective of what you say about badly expressing yourself.

No it doesn't, what it says is that if we need to see strikes i.e. if similar situations arise like those in Cork where the CB are clearly making decisions based on getting at their county players and not what is best for the GAA then striking can be used to effect change. I go on to say that I'm not sure any other county is as bad as Cork in this regard and therefore extreme actions will be unlikely in the future. So what I clearly said was that in certain circumstances, yes amateur players or volunteers can withdraw their services, a reasonably logical position I'd say.

[dowling]

Ah Jesus Zulu sure my post might only have been tongue in cheek also.

Well I hope so because aspects of it couldn't be taken seriously.

It's a bit rich to accuse me of being aggressive because I put on one post of exagerated language to make a point. I have faced plenty of aggression here.
And back to the 'grow up' because I point out the constant use of 'mildly colourful language'. The use of such language is aggressive in that consciously or sub-consciously it's an attempt to belittle the poster rather than address the post. It's use doesn't 'debate the issue'.

Your post was a bit agressive but it doesn't bother me in the slightest, unfortunately you constantly take offence to the mildest of rebuke's, you posted one or two things that were definitly factually wrong so i termed them 'rubbish', which IMO they were. Spare me the psyco-babble about unconsciously belittleing the poster, I'm just disagreeing with your opinion.

I have no ulterior motive to be on here other than personally I disagree with what the 2008 panel have done and believe it to be detrimental to Cork and the GAA in general. And I also believe the basis of the strike was an attempt to bully Gerald McCarthy as Teddy Holland was bullied last year.

Fair enough and finally you explain why you hold the position you do, I agree that you can interpret the players actions to be bullying however I feel that it was the CB who attempted to bully the players first. The players used the only means at their disposal to 'return fire' so to speak.

I'd like to manage a county team some day and I will have paid my dues by the time I feel I'll be capable of doing the job but if the players of a particular county can't stand me then the CB shouldn't appoint me, because i won't be able to do the job. And if I ever thought that the players of a particular team didn't want me then I'd refuse the post regardless of the 'democratic process' because I wouldn't enjoy it and I couldn't have success. That the CB reappointed Gerald and that he accepted raises huge questions over their motivations and therefore IMO justifies the players stance.

Surely ther's a conflict in those two statements.
But explain to me where I'm wrong, I've no problem with that and will accept correction.


I haven't said, nor do I think anyone against the srike has said, that the county board are without fault in this dispute or without faults in general. It is the pro posters who project that. My focus and I would say others is on the strike action. Reillers can dismiss all the quotes he wants but some people saw where this was going and some didn't. In the same way I believe this dispute if the strike wins could have damaging repercussions for Cork and the GAA in particular. Now there are no facts for me to produce as this refers to the future and the facts, whatever they may be haven't yet happened. I'm making deductions on what happened before and the potential outcome of this strike. If the 2008 panel win this strike it will be the third one and will feed any future notions of strike that once again this action will win out regarless of how much damage has to be caused first. And I do believe the GPA would attemt to capitalise on any win for the strike and they've alluded to future strikes.

[dowling]

Tbh if we need to see strikes and aggro in other counties then so be it IMO, however I'm not sure any other county is as bad as Cork in this regard. Nevertheless a lot of CB's could do with a shake up and this is clearly evidenced by the club fixtures in many counties.

That is quite clearly advocating strikes Zulu irrespective of what you say about badly expressing yourself.

No it doesn't, what it says is that if we need to see strikes i.e. if similar situations arise like those in Cork where the CB are clearly making decisions based on getting at their county players and not what is best for the GAA then striking can be used to effect change. I go on to say that I'm not sure any other county is as bad as Cork in this regard and therefore extreme actions will be unlikely in the future. So what I clearly said was that in certain circumstances, yes amateur players or volunteers can withdraw their services, a reasonably logical position I'd say.

You justify the present strike and justify the use of future strikes in certain circumstances. How is that not advocating strike action?

[Reillers]

And in the middle of this some of the Cork lads were in action with their college.
UCC v WIT in the Fitzgibbon Cup semi.

And of course Shane O Neill had an absolute blinder.

It'll be a waste if these boys don't get to play this season.

[Reillers]

Ah Jesus Zulu sure my post might only have been tongue in cheek also.

Well I hope so because aspects of it couldn't be taken seriously.

It's a bit rich to accuse me of being aggressive because I put on one post of exagerated language to make a point. I have faced plenty of aggression here.
And back to the 'grow up' because I point out the constant use of 'mildly colourful language'. The use of such language is aggressive in that consciously or sub-consciously it's an attempt to belittle the poster rather than address the post. It's use doesn't 'debate the issue'.

Your post was a bit agressive but it doesn't bother me in the slightest, unfortunately you constantly take offence to the mildest of rebuke's, you posted one or two things that were definitly factually wrong so i termed them 'rubbish', which IMO they were. Spare me the psyco-babble about unconsciously belittleing the poster, I'm just disagreeing with your opinion.

I have no ulterior motive to be on here other than personally I disagree with what the 2008 panel have done and believe it to be detrimental to Cork and the GAA in general. And I also believe the basis of the strike was an attempt to bully Gerald McCarthy as Teddy Holland was bullied last year.

Fair enough and finally you explain why you hold the position you do, I agree that you can interpret the players actions to be bullying however I feel that it was the CB who attempted to bully the players first. The players used the only means at their disposal to 'return fire' so to speak.

I'd like to manage a county team some day and I will have paid my dues by the time I feel I'll be capable of doing the job but if the players of a particular county can't stand me then the CB shouldn't appoint me, because i won't be able to do the job. And if I ever thought that the players of a particular team didn't want me then I'd refuse the post regardless of the 'democratic process' because I wouldn't enjoy it and I couldn't have success. That the CB reappointed Gerald and that he accepted raises huge questions over their motivations and therefore IMO justifies the players stance.

Surely ther's a conflict in those two statements.
But explain to me where I'm wrong, I've no problem with that and will accept correction.


I haven't said, nor do I think anyone against the srike has said, that the county board are without fault in this dispute or without faults in general. It is the pro posters who project that. My focus and I would say others is on the strike action. Reillers can dismiss all the quotes he wants but some people saw where this was going and some didn't. In the same way I believe this dispute if the strike wins could have damaging repercussions for Cork and the GAA in particular. Now there are no facts for me to produce as this refers to the future and the facts, whatever they may be haven't yet happened. I'm making deductions on what happened before and the potential outcome of this strike. If the 2008 panel win this strike it will be the third one and will feed any future notions of strike that once again this action will win out regarless of how much damage has to be caused first. And I do believe the GPA would attemt to capitalise on any win for the strike and they've alluded to future strikes.

How are the quotes relevant to my Dowling? How?
And I appreciate it if you replied to my post.
You have no facts to back any of your post Dowling yet you continue to do so.
They strike because they need to and each time they have downed tools they've done very well and benefited greatly from it.
Any strike that is justifed is justified. They shouldn't just not stroke because it's inconvienent. If there's a problem that can't be sorted any other way then so be it. It's gotten to a point in the GAA where some still think it's ok to treat the playres like they did till a few years ago and reality is they are still getting treated that badly in some places, like Cork.
No one wants anyone to have to strike but sometimes it's necessary.
Bash the GPA as much as you want but they have done some incredible good work for the players. They gave them a voice, despite people like yourself thinking they shouldn't have one and should put up or shut up.
I by no means am much of a GPA fan, but they have done good work and they have done more good work with weak hurling counties then the GAA has.
Have they not?

[anglocelt39]

You are completley anti player,


Refer prior post Reillers me auld mucker where I list a number of positives regarding the 08 panel, Unfortunately it's starting to seem that anybody who does not agree 100% with your rather one sided world view is "completely anti player". Sad really. If many of the protagonists in this little petty local squabble are of a similar mindset it's no wonder the things in such a pile of S@#@te.

By the way, have you written to RTE yet to demand a licence fee reduction for Miriams appalling errors and omissions on prime time the other night, can't remember what was hanging you up, maybe her pronunciation of Imokilly wasn't up to your exacting standards or whatever.

[dowling]

And in the middle of this some of the Cork lads were in action with their college.
UCC v WIT in the Fitzgibbon Cup semi.

And of course Shane O Neill had an absolute blinder.

It'll be a waste if these boys don't get to play this season.

Don't think anyone would disagree with that Reillers.

And if the leaders of the 2008 panel had choosen another route they might have been back by now already.

[Reillers]

You are completley anti player,


Refer prior post Reillers me auld mucker where I list a number of positives regarding the 08 panel, Unfortunately it's starting to seem that anybody who does not agree 100% with your rather one sided world view is "completely anti player". Sad really. If many of the protagonists in this little petty local squabble are of a similar mindset it's no wonder the things in such a pile of S@#@te.

By the way, have you written to RTE yet to demand a licence fee reduction for Miriams appalling errors and omissions on prime time the other night, can't remember what was hanging you up, maybe her pronunciation of Imokilly wasn't up to your exacting standards or whatever.

No see I respect people like Realrebel who don't agree with the players, but is genuine. You, Dowling and co aren't. And any time something that backs the players comes out it's made irrelevant, it's degraded by ye.
Ye're not genuine all ye do is whinge and bitch. And then go on about the players having no respect.
You make points like oh FM getting them off on this and oh going on a holiday, posted only by you to make the players look bad, no attempt to find a solution or anything from any of your posts, nothing constructive or nothing with backing just nit picking on the rare occasion when the CB functioned enough for a second so that they'd do their job, and saying that justifies this.
You make points like the RTE one there, and you wonder why I think you come on here for no other reason to whinge and bitch. How is that relevant to anything going on here.

[Reillers]

And in the middle of this some of the Cork lads were in action with their college.
UCC v WIT in the Fitzgibbon Cup semi.

And of course Shane O Neill had an absolute blinder.

It'll be a waste if these boys don't get to play this season.

Don't think anyone would disagree with that Reillers.

And if the leaders of the 2008 panel had choosen another route they might have been back by now already.

Again Dowling, what leaders, the young players have been just as if not more vocal then the so called leaders.
And nothing would have worked but the strike, I'm amazed that this has worked. But there's no way in hell going to the clubs first thing would have worked, they would not ALL have provoked the CB.
So what route do you suggest they should have taken which would have actually worked
There is none but this, the players wouldn't have chosen this route if there was another one that had any chance of working, they, despite what you think, don't enjoy this.

And will you please reply to my previous posts aimed at you.

[Zulu]

You justify the present strike and justify the use of future strikes in certain circumstances. How is that not advocating strike action? 

The key term here is in certain circumstances, there are many instances where we all would agree that doing something we ordinarily wouldn't agree with is ok, for example hitting a guy who just struck your wife/girlfriend as opposed to hitting a guy who bumped off you in a crowded pub.

Surely ther's a conflict in those two statements.

I don't see how. I haven't time now but i'll check back on what post I called rubbish and repost it for you.

I haven't said, nor do I think anyone against the srike has said, that the county board are without fault in this dispute or without faults in general. It is the pro posters who project that. My focus and I would say others is on the strike action.

Everyone seems to agree that the CB reappointed Gerald as a slap in the face to the hurlers and you agree that the democratic process is flawed and can even be manipulated by the CB yet you are trying to argue that the players should have taken this route?

Reillers can dismiss all the quotes he wants but some people saw where this was going and some didn't.

I posted a long time ago that the players would win because once the 09 panel take a few clippings in the league the pressure to get them back would be massive, that turned out to be as accurate a prediction as anything, or are you saying I was wrong?

The reality always was and always will be that the players are the real power base in the GAA, without them administrators, groundsmen, coaches, tea ladies etc. are all pointless but players realise that the other side of the coin holds true also. That players can't play without those different people helping out and because they do they'll never abuse their role, to do so would to bring the whole thing down around their ears. The only reason the players in Cork have gone on strike is because they were justified in doing so and in the end the ordinary club man saw this. If players were to ever go on strike for pay for play then they'd be turfed out and we'd get other lads in or just return to club action as the center piece of the GAA. Scare stories about the imminent destruction of teh GAA are just that, scare strories, the players know the reality of professional sport in Ireland as well as anyone here.

[dowling]

Ah Jesus Zulu sure my post might only have been tongue in cheek also.

Well I hope so because aspects of it couldn't be taken seriously.

It's a bit rich to accuse me of being aggressive because I put on one post of exagerated language to make a point. I have faced plenty of aggression here.
And back to the 'grow up' because I point out the constant use of 'mildly colourful language'. The use of such language is aggressive in that consciously or sub-consciously it's an attempt to belittle the poster rather than address the post. It's use doesn't 'debate the issue'.

Your post was a bit agressive but it doesn't bother me in the slightest, unfortunately you constantly take offence to the mildest of rebuke's, you posted one or two things that were definitly factually wrong so i termed them 'rubbish', which IMO they were. Spare me the psyco-babble about unconsciously belittleing the poster, I'm just disagreeing with your opinion.

I have no ulterior motive to be on here other than personally I disagree with what the 2008 panel have done and believe it to be detrimental to Cork and the GAA in general. And I also believe the basis of the strike was an attempt to bully Gerald McCarthy as Teddy Holland was bullied last year.

Fair enough and finally you explain why you hold the position you do, I agree that you can interpret the players actions to be bullying however I feel that it was the CB who attempted to bully the players first. The players used the only means at their disposal to 'return fire' so to speak.

I'd like to manage a county team some day and I will have paid my dues by the time I feel I'll be capable of doing the job but if the players of a particular county can't stand me then the CB shouldn't appoint me, because i won't be able to do the job. And if I ever thought that the players of a particular team didn't want me then I'd refuse the post regardless of the 'democratic process' because I wouldn't enjoy it and I couldn't have success. That the CB reappointed Gerald and that he accepted raises huge questions over their motivations and therefore IMO justifies the players stance.

Surely ther's a conflict in those two statements.
But explain to me where I'm wrong, I've no problem with that and will accept correction.


I haven't said, nor do I think anyone against the srike has said, that the county board are without fault in this dispute or without faults in general. It is the pro posters who project that. My focus and I would say others is on the strike action. Reillers can dismiss all the quotes he wants but some people saw where this was going and some didn't. In the same way I believe this dispute if the strike wins could have damaging repercussions for Cork and the GAA in particular. Now there are no facts for me to produce as this refers to the future and the facts, whatever they may be haven't yet happened. I'm making deductions on what happened before and the potential outcome of this strike. If the 2008 panel win this strike it will be the third one and will feed any future notions of strike that once again this action will win out regarless of how much damage has to be caused first. And I do believe the GPA would attemt to capitalise on any win for the strike and they've alluded to future strikes.

How are the quotes relevant to my Dowling? How?
And I appreciate it if you replied to my post.
You have no facts to back any of your post Dowling yet you continue to do so.
They strike because they need to and each time they have downed tools they've done very well and benefited greatly from it.
Any strike that is justifed is justified. They shouldn't just not stroke because it's inconvienent. If there's a problem that can't be sorted any other way then so be it. It's gotten to a point in the GAA where some still think it's ok to treat the playres like they did till a few years ago and reality is they are still getting treated that badly in some places, like Cork.
No one wants anyone to have to strike but sometimes it's necessary.
Bash the GPA as much as you want but they have done some incredible good work for the players. They gave them a voice, despite people like yourself thinking they shouldn't have one and should put up or shut up.
I by no means am much of a GPA fan, but they have done good work and they have done more good work with weak hurling counties then the GAA has.
Have they not?

I'm referring to the quotes from your posts reillers. The first one is your first on this debate on page 2 and the last is the 25th Oct I think.
They're not out of context. In fact the consistency of them shows you couldn't see where this was going, just like the 2008 panel.
And whatever happens at the end of the day, it's the clubs who will decide what will happen not the strike. The route that many of us have been cosistently saying needed to be taken to effect change.

[Reillers]

Ah Jesus Zulu sure my post might only have been tongue in cheek also.

Well I hope so because aspects of it couldn't be taken seriously.

It's a bit rich to accuse me of being aggressive because I put on one post of exagerated language to make a point. I have faced plenty of aggression here.
And back to the 'grow up' because I point out the constant use of 'mildly colourful language'. The use of such language is aggressive in that consciously or sub-consciously it's an attempt to belittle the poster rather than address the post. It's use doesn't 'debate the issue'.

Your post was a bit agressive but it doesn't bother me in the slightest, unfortunately you constantly take offence to the mildest of rebuke's, you posted one or two things that were definitly factually wrong so i termed them 'rubbish', which IMO they were. Spare me the psyco-babble about unconsciously belittleing the poster, I'm just disagreeing with your opinion.

I have no ulterior motive to be on here other than personally I disagree with what the 2008 panel have done and believe it to be detrimental to Cork and the GAA in general. And I also believe the basis of the strike was an attempt to bully Gerald McCarthy as Teddy Holland was bullied last year.

Fair enough and finally you explain why you hold the position you do, I agree that you can interpret the players actions to be bullying however I feel that it was the CB who attempted to bully the players first. The players used the only means at their disposal to 'return fire' so to speak.

I'd like to manage a county team some day and I will have paid my dues by the time I feel I'll be capable of doing the job but if the players of a particular county can't stand me then the CB shouldn't appoint me, because i won't be able to do the job. And if I ever thought that the players of a particular team didn't want me then I'd refuse the post regardless of the 'democratic process' because I wouldn't enjoy it and I couldn't have success. That the CB reappointed Gerald and that he accepted raises huge questions over their motivations and therefore IMO justifies the players stance.

Surely ther's a conflict in those two statements.
But explain to me where I'm wrong, I've no problem with that and will accept correction.


I haven't said, nor do I think anyone against the srike has said, that the county board are without fault in this dispute or without faults in general. It is the pro posters who project that. My focus and I would say others is on the strike action. Reillers can dismiss all the quotes he wants but some people saw where this was going and some didn't. In the same way I believe this dispute if the strike wins could have damaging repercussions for Cork and the GAA in particular. Now there are no facts for me to produce as this refers to the future and the facts, whatever they may be haven't yet happened. I'm making deductions on what happened before and the potential outcome of this strike. If the 2008 panel win this strike it will be the third one and will feed any future notions of strike that once again this action will win out regarless of how much damage has to be caused first. And I do believe the GPA would attemt to capitalise on any win for the strike and they've alluded to future strikes.

How are the quotes relevant to my Dowling? How?
And I appreciate it if you replied to my post.
You have no facts to back any of your post Dowling yet you continue to do so.
They strike because they need to and each time they have downed tools they've done very well and benefited greatly from it.
Any strike that is justifed is justified. They shouldn't just not stroke because it's inconvienent. If there's a problem that can't be sorted any other way then so be it. It's gotten to a point in the GAA where some still think it's ok to treat the playres like they did till a few years ago and reality is they are still getting treated that badly in some places, like Cork.
No one wants anyone to have to strike but sometimes it's necessary.
Bash the GPA as much as you want but they have done some incredible good work for the players. They gave them a voice, despite people like yourself thinking they shouldn't have one and should put up or shut up.
I by no means am much of a GPA fan, but they have done good work and they have done more good work with weak hurling counties then the GAA has.
Have they not?

I'm referring to the quotes from your posts reillers. The first one is your first on this debate on page 2 and the last is the 25th Oct I think.
They're not out of context. In fact the consistency of them shows you couldn't see where this was going, just like the 2008 panel.
And whatever happens at the end of the day, it's the clubs who will decide what will happen not the strike. The route that many of us have been cosistently saying needed to be taken to effect change.

On page 2. A lot things hadn't happened. (and maybe you can give me the page of each of the quotes you took as well.)
They are completle out of context. I couldn't give a flying monkey if I was wrong then, no one say where this was going. All I care about is the solution.
All most, except you and one or two of your friends, care about is what happens next and I'm not apologising for not being phsycic.

Everyone in Cork knew though that it was only a matter of time before an all out work broke out between the CB. That I did see coming.
2002, 2007 and now 2009. IF that had been solved, it probably wouldn't have happened this year at all. Just whenever the hell the next fight broke out next season, the season after that. It was only a matter of time.
That was my point.

So now, can you please actually reply to that post without trying to draw attention away from it by posting irrelevant quotes from pg 2 or from when it looked like it was all about to end in Oct.

[dowling]

You justify the present strike and justify the use of future strikes in certain circumstances. How is that not advocating strike action? 

The key term here is in certain circumstances[/i], there are many instances where we all would agree that doing something we ordinarily wouldn't agree with is ok, for example hitting a guy who just struck your wife/girlfriend as opposed to hitting a guy who bumped off you in a crowded pub.

Surely ther's a conflict in those two statements.

I don't see how. I haven't time now but i'll check back on what post I called rubbish and repost it for you.

I haven't said, nor do I think anyone against the srike has said, that the county board are without fault in this dispute or without faults in general. It is the pro posters who project that. My focus and I would say others is on the strike action.

Everyone seems to agree that the CB reappointed Gerald as a slap in the face to the hurlers and you agree that the democratic process is flawed and can even be manipulated by the CB yet you are trying to argue that the players should have taken this route?

Reillers can dismiss all the quotes he wants but some people saw where this was going and some didn't.

I posted a long time ago that the players would win because once the 09 panel take a few clippings in the league the pressure to get them back would be massive, that turned out to be as accurate a prediction as anything, or are you saying I was wrong?

The reality always was and always will be that the players are the real power base in the GAA, without them administrators, groundsmen, coaches, tea ladies etc. are all pointless but players realise that the other side of the coin holds true also. That players can't play without those different people helping out and because they do they'll never abuse their role, to do so would to bring the whole thing down around their ears. The only reason the players in Cork have gone on strike is because they were justified in doing so and in the end the ordinary club man saw this. If players were to ever go on strike for pay for play then they'd be turfed out and we'd get other lads in or just return to club action as the center piece of the GAA. Scare stories about the imminent destruction of teh GAA are just that, scare strories, the players know the reality of professional sport in Ireland as well as anyone here.

I understand what you're saying Zulu about certain circumstances but you're still an advocate of the use of strike action, even if it is only in certain circumstances.

But who's to define when those certain circumstances apply.

Someone may not strike back in defence of a wife for different reasons and one may be they can't justify such or maybe they would call the guards as a better way to resolve the issue.