McCarthy admits he does not have backing of Cork hurlers

[orangeman]

They are going to insist on a new committee to pick the new coach comprising of 7 people.
2 from the county board.
2 from the clubs.
2 players
plus a chairman independent of the above groups.



Not a very radical departure from what we have now - not exactly what you would describe as outside the box thinking.


Is this what this row was all about


It had to come to this in order to get this dispute resolved ?


One thing that has been accounted for in this formula - what happens when the players fall out with the manager and don't want him anymore and call for further industrial action ?

OM after all of this you still  ask the same idiotic questions.
Are you that much of a wind up or are really that stupid?

The players worked their asses off under Gerald and gave it their all. It wasn't about disagreeing with him. THIS WAS NEVER ABOUT GERALD PERSONALLY IT WAS ABOUT THE WAY IN WHICH HE WAS REAPPOINTED, THE DECISION MADE BY THE CB.

What happens when the players on't fanct their manager anymore ?? More strikes ? How will this eventuality be covered or do Cork players believe they have a right to strike ?

[Reillers]

They are going to insist on a new committee to pick the new coach comprising of 7 people.
2 from the county board.
2 from the clubs.
2 players
plus a chairman independent of the above groups.



Not a very radical departure from what we have now - not exactly what you would describe as outside the box thinking.


Is this what this row was all about


It had to come to this in order to get this dispute resolved ?


One thing that has been accounted for in this formula - what happens when the players fall out with the manager and don't want him anymore and call for further industrial action ?

OM after all of this you still  ask the same idiotic questions.
Are you that much of a wind up or are really that stupid?

The players worked their asses off under Gerald and gave it their all. It wasn't about disagreeing with him. THIS WAS NEVER ABOUT GERALD PERSONALLY IT WAS ABOUT THE WAY IN WHICH HE WAS REAPPOINTED, THE DECISION MADE BY THE CB.

What happens when the players on't fanct their manager anymore ?? More strikes ? How will this eventuality be covered or do Cork players believe they have a right to strike ?

Well that answered my question above, and that wasn't even English OM. Use your words.
Why do you think the players had taken this action.

IT WAS BECAUSE OF THE CB!! NOTHING PERSONAL TO GERALD, IT WAS BECAUSE OF A DECISION MADE BY THE CB.

After all of this and you still come out with crap like this, you're either idiotic or a complete WUM, can't decide which yet.

[orangeman]

I think you're missing the point a bit but I guess you feel under pressure at the moment -


The strikers signed up to an arrangement where there would be no more strikes - they reneged on that agreement -

The strikers refused to enter talks with the CB because they said there would not be equal representation.  So what if FM gets the 2 clubs on his side and given that you claim that he has everyone in his pocket, this is therefore quite a likely scenario, then we're back to square one.


Does it make sense to you or should I spell it out for you ?.

[Reillers]

I think you're missing the point a bit but I guess you feel under pressure at the moment -


The strikers signed up to an arrangement where there would be no more strikes - they reneged on that agreement -

The strikers refused to enter talks with the CB because they said there would not be equal representation.  So what if FM gets the 2 clubs on his side and given that you claim that he has everyone in his pocket, this is therefore quite a likely scenario, then we're back to square one.


Does it make sense to you or should I spell it out for you ?.

And when have they ever said this was a strike?

The players wanted to meet the Cb and Gerald several times but they never got back to them and of course that was conveniently left out by the CB.
They didn't have equal representations. 2 players, and 2 from Gerald's backroom team and 2 of the CB, is hardly equal representation.
FM hasn't got 2 clubs on his side. But anyway, he's never had clubs in his pocket, just delegates. What's a likely scenario, your post don't make sense, in an English language way.

[orangeman]

I think you're missing the point a bit but I guess you feel under pressure at the moment -


The strikers signed up to an arrangement where there would be no more strikes - they reneged on that agreement -

The strikers refused to enter talks with the CB because they said there would not be equal representation.  So what if FM gets the 2 clubs on his side and given that you claim that he has everyone in his pocket, this is therefore quite a likely scenario, then we're back to square one.


Does it make sense to you or should I spell it out for you ?.

And when have they ever said this was a strike?

The players wanted to meet the Cb and Gerald several times but they never got back to them and of course that was conveniently left out by the CB.
They didn't have equal representations. 2 players, and 2 from Gerald's backroom team and 2 of the CB, is hardly equal representation.
FM hasn't got 2 clubs on his side. But anyway, he's never had clubs in his pocket, just delegates. What's a likely scenario, your post don't make sense, in an English language way.

And when have they ever said this was a strike?



Ok let's call it industrial action then. What would you call it ?

[heffo]

Are those figures for clubs or delegates

What?

What? what does that mean?

According to the likes of you there were over 400 at the last meeting but only around 140 clubs were represented by two reps/delegates.
So now how many clubs were represented and how many votes did each club have?

It's not a difficult question so stop acting the wag. Especially as none of your like could say where the 400 figure came from.

And yes gardaí gave the figure 3000 at most so I'm entitled to question any figures you give.

Maybe it meant that I didn't get what you were asking me.
Nearly every club was represented at the meeting.
Last time it was discussion based purely, this time it was going to let the votes be known from their clubs, so more then likely only one rep from each club went.
Surely that's obvious..apparently not.

No there's nothing obvious about figures with you. The 400 doesn't tally with the number of clubs represented. You guessed the figure at the march today of 7000 and then changed the figure to 5000 and where you got your figure from to RTE/FM, but you couldn't remember which. So how many votes did each club have and how many clubs were represented and not represented?

Sure you probably don't know the last bit. Just everything else, although you're not sure how.

Didn't doubt for a minute you'd get Corcoran and have an answer.


Now answer that bit.

Each club that held an EGM called for a vote and it was voted on by the people there on both motions.

Who were these 'people' there? Were they paid up club members?

Club members.

Did you see the attendance sheet and cross reference that against the membership list by club for 2009?

Or was anyone who was foaming at the mouth and muttering stuff like 'Up Donal Og' or 'Down with Frank' let in?

Please advise how you reached the conclusion they were paid up club members for 2009?

[Hound]

There's a lot of otherwise sensible posters posting a lot of rubbish.

Well said!

I totally agree with muppet and passedit.

[heffo]

The figure for the 'march' today I heard was 3000. Surely the 2008 panel and their supporters have to be dissappointed with a drop of around 7000 and certainly it discredits the given figure of around 10,000 for the first march. And surely it gives the county board a greater resolve to contend this challange to the rules and procedures of the Cork GAA as voted for by the clubs.

As for the numbers voting in clubs,eg Nemo; How many members would Nemo have and of their membership how many didn't involve themselves in the vote? And when it's taken accross the board you would have to think that the number voting pro panel, while a majority in those clubs who have voted, although a minority of the clubs in the county so far, are a minority of the county members, considering how many haven't voted.

Reillers reports the figures as 7000 at the march

RTE & the Gardai report the figure as 3000

I said what I was told. There was about 5000 at the march.

Were you not at the march? Are you copying and pasting from proc & rebelgaa again?

Were the Gardai and RTE lying when they reported the crowd as 3000?

I was but surprisingly I didn't take a head count.
I'm not talking about the crowd I was talking about the march outside.
And speaking of lying are you going to admit that you were completley talking through your ass about talking to Bob?

Thats fair enough so - the way you phrased it though sounded like you weren't.

I was talking to Bobby late last night, I didn't text him the link though - I wouldn't do that regardless of how much I disagree with you..

Why do you dislike him so much? He's always been a decent skin and good company socially..

You weren't talking to him. And I never said once that I was from there.
And I still don't think I insulted him once on here, and you have failed to produce any evidence otherwise.
And nearly the entire of Cork GAA despises, what is it they call him, "Sideshow Bob."

Ok we'll agree to disagree on Bob so - he gets unfairly tarnished because of that Tipp game but I always found him to be a straight talker.

I'll drop the issue if you like - you insulted him along the lines of 'My club are trying to have an SGM but it won't happen if a certain somebody in my club who knows the rules inside out and is very powerful in Cork GAA has his way, no one likes this guy and he's a spoofer and a gouger and not a nice person'..

Anyway this thread will be coming to a close by next weekend and Donal Og can submit his preferred choice of candidate - normal order will be resumed and the 2008 hurlers can continue to make personal profit ahead of that of the clubs..

I never said it was my club.

You didn't have to - when you were taunting Indiana & Dowling the other day saying anyone who knew anything about Cork hurling could identify your club - anyhoo it's none of my business and if you want to deny it thats fair enough

I never said it and I still haven't. And even then, what right do you think you have to discuss it on here, when a mod checks this forum you probably will be band because of all the posts you made directed at me and personal posts about finances and such which also breach the rules.
I gave you know right to discuss something that was none of your business about my personal life.
And it will probably warrant a ban, and that's your fault.

Just for the record Reillers, you've defamed Frank Murphy on countless occassions in this thread, called the named Cork GAA PRO a 'p***k' and insulted every poster who disagreed with you - so come down off that perch

What do you mean about a 'band'? I'm not involved in the music industry whatsoever..

None of it was personal, an opinion. Nothing like what you posted about me or about the so called gainings of the person.
Insulted them, no more then they did to me, calling them an idiot, when they posted an idiotic post is one thing. That doesn't warrant a ban.
I'm pretty sure, but not a mod, that what you have been posting does about me, my personal backround and the clubs personal life.

Calling Gerard Lane (the Cork PRO) a p***k isn't personal?

You've defamed Frank countless times

I posted nothing about your 'personal background' or the 'clubs personal life' (whatever that is)...plenty of others posted your club before I did - I only put two and two together when I realised you were insulting my friend Bobby (another person you've defamed)

Which I retracted almost.

You made personal comments about me which I gave you know permision to do so.
And again, show me where I insulted him. I didn't.

I couldn't care less to be honest what you posted, but then again I'm not a mod.

How do you 'almost retract' calling someone a p***k?

What personal comments did I make about you? Did you seek permission before you insulted all those who disagreed with your opinion and all those who disagreed with the strikers?

You insulted my friend Bob, but I'm happy to leave it at that and concentrate on the issue at hand..

I never finished the sentence, I meant almost straight away.
You went on about the club that you think I'm from and said I was from that club without me saying you could do so.
And again I didn't insult him once, find me where and then I'll leave it at that, because I know full well that I haven't.

You did finish the sentence - you posted it

I didn't 'go on about the club you're from' - I repeated an assertion previously made by a number of posters about what club you're from after you'd insulted and taunted them - I only did this when I realised you'd insulted my good friend Bob Honohan. I've already posted where you insulted him - 'This gouger in my club won't let us have an EGM, he's really horrible and no-one likes him'. You also called him 'Sideshow Bob'.- Now will you leave it at that and the two of you can sort it out yourselves..

[cornafean]

The clubs have spoken.
...
193-0 in favour of Ger Mc stepping down.

Is is really only a few months ago, that some people on this thread argued that there was something odd, if not downright dodgy, about unanimous or landslide votes at GAA meetings?  Or maybe they only meant CCB meetings? 

[orangeman]

I've no doubt that when the previous votes in favour of Gerald were taken and in favour of him, they were an accurate reflection of the way the delegates / clubs felt.

But the 2008 panel have applied serious pressure in the last number of weeks, using all the scare tactics, all the threats that they have at their disposal, whipping up mass hysteria, organising protest marches, press conferences, external meetings, GPA pressure, threats to heighten the industrial action by bringing in the footballers, EHMs, SGMs, using the media to get their point across (one striker even using the launch of a big brand name as a way of securing maximum coverage ). Every time you opened a paper Colm Keys or some other 2008 panel spokesman had a big headline, "PRESSURE GROWS ON MC CARTHY" or " BOARD MUST ACT NOW" or like this morning's " MC CARTHY ON THE BRINK AS CLUBS UP ANTE".

Meanwhile the 2009 panel do their best but get beat in their 3 league outings and pictures of the 2008 panel appear alongside the match report of the 2009 panel getting beaten.

So the clubs haved turned full circle and have backed the 2008 panel. Funny how things can change.

John Gardiner said last night whilst Graham Canty, Anthony Lynch, Daniel Goulding, John Hayes and Pierce O'Neill were standing beside him :

" It's obvious now that democracy wasn't working, but if the people of Cork and the grassroots get their way on Tuesday night then we'll be back playing AND THAT WAS OUR GOAL ALL ALONG".

I thought it was all about saving Cork hurling ( or is it saved now - the 2008 panel are back ?? ).

[bottlethrower7]

For one of the greatest hurling teams of our age to be training away alone twice a week while a regiment of spotty imposters fill their jersey.

what an utterly disgraceful comment by Humphries. Jesus, has this man no shame?

Or how about this one;

an unfortunate bunch of tyros willing to be cast in the role of blacklegs

[heffo]

For one of the greatest hurling teams of our age to be training away alone twice a week while a regiment of spotty imposters fill their jersey.

what an utterly disgraceful comment by Humphries. Jesus, has this man no shame?

Or how about this one;

an unfortunate bunch of tyros willing to be cast in the role of blacklegs

Talk about losing the run of himself..

[INDIANA]

For one of the greatest hurling teams of our age to be training away alone twice a week while a regiment of spotty imposters fill their jersey.

what an utterly disgraceful comment by Humphries. Jesus, has this man no shame?

Or how about this one;

an unfortunate bunch of tyros willing to be cast in the role of blacklegs

I'm not sure even a pro-player individual could agree with his articles in the last few weeks. Thats a shocking comment because its a direct insult to those players rather than an inferred one. You'd begin to wonder the licence he's given at editorial level. He'll certainly be getting a direct email from me on the subject. His column this morning is ludricrous.
He's entitled to his opinion but not to directly insult people who haven't in any way insulted anyone in the debate.

[heffo]

For one of the greatest hurling teams of our age to be training away alone twice a week while a regiment of spotty imposters fill their jersey.

what an utterly disgraceful comment by Humphries. Jesus, has this man no shame?

Or how about this one;

an unfortunate bunch of tyros willing to be cast in the role of blacklegs

I'm not sure even a pro-player individual could agree with his articles in the last few weeks. Thats a shocking comment because its a direct insult to those players rather than an inferred one. You'd begin to wonder the licence he's given at editorial level. He'll certainly be getting a direct email from me on the subject. His column this morning is ludricrous.
He's entitled to his opinion but not to directly insult people who haven't in any way insulted anyone in the debate.

Well he allegedly has a tendency to throw the toys from the pram when any editorial control is applied - see his article on Michelle DeBrun and his alleged subsequent resignation from the Times..

[bingobus]

I see the papers today have the pictures of the great Cork Hurling man who addressed the march yesterday and was at the match as one of the protestors - the great DES BISHOP