McCarthy admits he does not have backing of Cork hurlers

[bingobus]

If they decided to leave it up to each individual to go and only 5 went, regardless of mass cards, reasons behind the collective decision or anything else can change the fact that 25 players choose not to attend at either removal or funeral.

That to me is very hard to understand.

[dowling]

The players explained their position, they felt if they all went that it might be interpreted "as inflammatory, insincere and insensitive, transforming the event into a point-scoring circus", you may not accept this but I do. Neither of us know if that was the reason or not but you want to see something bad in everything the panel do, I don't. What is your point in posting about this, is it just venting? All your doing is raking over old news, this happened a good while ago now and I'm sure we argued the issue at the time, what is your reason for trying to do so again?

I have stepped back from this thread for a little while, but thats the most ridiculous excuse I have heard in ages.

That post is a perfect example of why this thread is now completely ridiculous, I and others think it is a reasonable position to hold and Galwaybhoy, dowling and others think it is not so surely the only sensible thing is to agree to disagree.

I find it strange however that 30 men who over the course of 2 years had spent an awful lot of time in the company of another man didn't see fit to attend the funeral of his mother. And maybe I could take it from your clever answer that you wouldn't think I was wrong.

I don't think the players were right or wrong nor do I think their decision reflects badly on them as people, however I think they should have gone to the funeral. Most of them didn't and some of ye want to hang them out to dry over, for me it was one of many unfortunate incidents in the whole saga, nothing more.

And no none of us know for definite why Shannon wrote that particular article or why now. If you feel unable to come to a spectulative conclusion on it fair enough.
But if you can't speculate as to the reasons why then you don't really have any grounds to criticise those of us who do. You can't really counter our arguments if you don't have one of your own

Of course I can, and your post is further evidence of just how pointless this has become, you agree you're only speculating as to Shannon's motives yet you want me to speculate also and then we can debate the merits of each others speculations. It makes as much sense as two 7 year olds arguing about the 'facts of life', i.e. neither of us know if our argument has any real basis in fact.

The only reason for debate is to convince the other part of the merits of your point of view, we have all made various points and few if any have changed their position in any meaningful way, so I'll ask again why are some posters rehashing old arguments? I've made my position clear repeatedly and tbh I've little interest in this anymore, the national leagues are in full swing and there is plenty to discuss there.  It appears to me as if some posters don't have much interest in other aspects of the GAA because this has been done to death.

And Ill point out again, it was someone not often in this debate who raised this issue again and Reillers who put up Shannon's article. You seem to think it's ok to comment but not those with an opposing view.

Of course a large part of this debate is based on speculation. Reillers asking for Considines best 15 is speculation because we don't know for definite who he'll pick. What we can do is use any information at our diposal, form of players, and style of manager to attemp to predict his team. It's not scientific but it's not a stab in the dark because we at least have something to go on.

None of the 2008 panel went to the funeral and while you cop out with "not knowing if it was right or wrong" you also copped out answering if you thought it was strange. I'm not trying to point score and you're right there will be little chance of people on this board changing their minds but it's the people who read it rather than contribute to it who I'd be more concerned about.
However it is strange that out of 30 men who had worked with this other man for two years not one attended his mother's funeral and 25 couldn't go to the wake.
For the sake of your arguments in support of the 2008 panel you can't acknowledge it's strange because to do so would mean you would have to ask other questions and you might end up arriving at a different conclusion.

[Tatler Jack]

To clear the ridiculous accusations of boycotting that no one had any proof of whatsoever but ye continued to attack them, I thought it'd calm ye down and stop ye bitching but surprise surprise ye found something else to attack the players on. Should have none (known)better, it's all ye do. You can't even except (accept)the fact that Shannon might be right, instead you question his credibility as a writer and his integrity. You can't for a second except (accept)or admit that ye may be right. No always some sort of alternative motive with you. Always an excuse.

Your desire to calm us down is admirable Reillers but you administered the wrong tablets. Anyway you should try calming down yourself.

First the players could have let this issue go - instead they ran with their version of the story to one of their favourite journalists who they knew would put a good spin on it. Secondly there was no need to discuss as a group whether or not to go to a funeral. They could have gone discretely as individuals and there would have been no circus.

I or other posters did not attribute any motive to them - just it was bad form and bad judgement compounded by running to Shannon with their side of the story. If they said straight out "sorry we were wrong" then I would respect them. But then this group and their supporters never admit to being wrong about anything!!

[orangeman]

You can just imagine later in the summer how many "conference calls" there will be if the wrong type of pasta is used in the chicken and pasta dish for the after training meal - there will be beig trouble if it's not their preferred spread that is used on the sandwiches and I wouldn't like to be the poor old caterer who produces anything other than club Energise !


These lads are watching too much  of Beckham.


You can dress it all you like about Shannon and everything else that is written about these lads, but the fact still remains that Dowling was correct to point out that it is NOT the norm for lads who have been on a county panel NOT to attend the manager's mother's funeral. If they didn't want to go to the funeral, why didn't they go to the removal, send a personal mass card, send a wreath, do something but for all of them not to attend collectively is a sign that these lads have been poorly advised all along by the shop stewards in this dispute. Hopefully new, sensible thinking shop stewards can be appointed for this season at least.

[Zulu]

And Ill point out again, it was someone not often in this debate who raised this issue again and Reillers who put up Shannon's article. You seem to think it's ok to comment but not those with an opposing view.

Not at all I didn't know who brought it up again I just don't see the point in any of us talking about it again, we've done it already and opinions haven't changed.

f course a large part of this debate is based on speculation. Reillers asking for Considines best 15 is speculation because we don't know for definite who he'll pick. What we can do is use any information at our diposal, form of players, and style of manager to attemp to predict his team. It's not scientific but it's not a stab in the dark because we at least have something to go on.

That's a different type of speculation, that's simply talking about team selection whereas your trying to debate a persons motivation for writing something and therefore since neither of us are him were arguing about something neither of us can be sure of our 'facts'. Additionally both our interpretations are coloured by our opinion on the wider issue so neither of us is really looking at it entirely objectively so to rehash this all again is completely pointless.

None of the 2008 panel went to the funeral and while you cop out with "not knowing if it was right or wrong" you also copped out answering if you thought it was strange. I'm not trying to point score and you're right there will be little chance of people on this board changing their minds but it's the people who read it rather than contribute to it who I'd be more concerned about.
However it is strange that out of 30 men who had worked with this other man for two years not one attended his mother's funeral and 25 couldn't go to the wake.
For the sake of your arguments in support of the 2008 panel you can't acknowledge it's strange because to do so would mean you would have to ask other questions and you might end up arriving at a different conclusion.

I've already accepted that the players should have gone to the funeral but i also understand why some did not, my opinion on all of this is not, nor will it be, influenced by one or two incidents. I think the players were right to strike because the CB reappointed Gerald for the wrong reasons, what has happened since doesn't change that fact and therefore I won't change my opinion. Oh and dowling get off the stage, 'I'm more interested in those who read this thread', get over yourself man, I'd say anyone reading this has their mind made up long ago and those that haven't well I hope they're more intelligent than to base their opinions on the views of lads who are only interpreting the secondhand information that they get.

[orangeman]

Labour boss stands over Rebel deal
By DAMIAN LAWLOR
Sunday March 15 2009
K IERAN MULVEY, the chief executive of the Labour Relations Commission, is fully standing by the arbitration process he recommended for Cork GAA last year.
And he maintains that his system could have succeeded down south -- had there been goodwill on both sides of the divide.
Speaking to the Sunday Independent, he said he never contemplated getting involved in the latest dispute after experiencing at first hand the bitterness that exists between players, officials and managers in February 2008.
Back then, he made three recommendations in his binding arbitration: that Teddy Holland would be removed as football manager; that future managers would be appointed by a selection committee (three county board members and two player representatives) and that Cork players were not allowed to go on strike from then on,
However, with another strike just passed and the managerial selection process he recommended in tatters, Mulvey insists that he still believes in last year's ruling.
"In my opinion, I feel that the agreement I brokered still stands," he said. "I think it will stand the test of time. Last year, I did believe that with the level of commitment, training and competitiveness that inter-county players bring to the table we needed to bring the managerial selection process on a generation.
"We needed to ensure that the players had some involvement in the process of picking a new manager. At the time, people criticised me but some agreed. I am saying that system is still the right one. But it can only be achieved by goodwill on both sides. I tried to give the players in Cork a say -- they had two votes out of five -- but still it didn't work.
"I don't want to apportion blame now. I am not in a position to adjudicate on why it didn't work. I cannot have my neutrality questioned. All I can say is that with everyone's agreement and support it could have worked. The system is still valid for the future."
Mulvey also spoke of the enormous amount of baggage on both sides. "People need to realise that this whole dispute is clouded with sub-agendas," he said. "Those issues came with me when I went down to arbitrate last year. I am not a commercial arbitrator but even before I started there last year I found there were a lot of difficulties surrounding commercial contracts, for instance."
Although, the LRC boss would not go into exact specifics, it's understood he was referring to a row between the board and players over whether the county adopted Club Energise or Powerade as their official energy drink.
In the end, the board lost contracts with Coca-Cola and Lucozade as Club Energise continued to be the players' drink of choice.
Mulvey did add: "The Cork County Board can achieve some of the most lucrative sponsorship contracts in the Association and in the past they showered the benefits of those on the team and their clubs. But still commercial problems existed between the players and the board and they were always there. As I say, I am not a commercial arbitrator and have no axe to grind, but last year's challenge was tough enough as it was without this added complexity."
Mulvey also revealed why he didn't want to get involved in the most recent row. "I found it deeply uncomfortable recommending that Teddy Holland should step down last year," he said. "Teddy is a man of great principle but unfortunately it was the only way to get that particular dispute resolved. There was no way I was going down again for a repeat of that -- especially with a man of the calibre of Gerald McCarthy involved.
"That a living GAA legend like Gerald could be humiliated in such a fashion by the people whom he brought so much to reflects badly on those who call themselves supporters of the Association," he continued. "Any supporter who mistreated this man should drop their heads in shame. Everyone in Cork owes him a deep gratitude for what he has done and they owe him a deep apology too. It just seems that everybody and anybody can be sacrificed to get a team out playing."In fact, the intensity of happenings in the past two or three weeks has taken me aback. The challenge now for the hurlers -- and the footballers -- is to go out and win an All-Ireland title. Titles are decided on the playing field and it's the 15 players and their colleagues -- not the manager -- who can go and win games.
"I'll withhold my final judgement on the whole affair until the end of the championships," he concluded.
- DAMIAN LAWLOR

[dowling]

"Oh and dowling get off the stage, 'I'm more interested in those who read this thread', get over yourself man, I'd say anyone reading this has their mind made up long ago and those that haven't well I hope they're more intelligent than to base their opinions on the views of lads who are only interpreting the secondhand information that they get."


You know Zulu I was actually agreeing with you about the unliklihood of changing each others opinions here. The point I was making was that people who were maybe undecided in their views reading this would at least get a bit of balance and/or a fuller picture. I've been trying to keep from anything personal in this and offered an apology in case a certain post came across differently but yourself and reillers always seem to revert to type.

I don't agree that the comparison I gave about speculation was misplaced, but we speculate every day. We have all set out our positions on this dispute but we have constantly speculated on where it was going and what might happen. Indeed people 'on both sides' speculated Gerald would lose out.

As for Shannon his track record is one that is pro-active in favour of the 2008 panel. If his information came from any source other than the 2008 panel he would most likely have hinted at that source. It isn't unreasonable to think this was a pr exercise on behalf of that panel and by his focus on Cosidine an attempt to keep OGrady in the spotlight.

No I don't think you'll change your opinion but I do believe you feel very awkward about the wake and funeral. But as I said if you do acknowledge that you might have to change your opinion because if it is proven that the panel's leaders sought players not to go what would that say about their integrity?

[heffo]

I'm not going to make any further contributions to this thread unless there are significant updates.

I will say though that Kieran Shannon for me lost any credibility he had as a journalist yesterday.

His piece in the Tribune made no attempt to remain objective and it read like a press release for the 2008 panel.

Sport and GAA in particular has taken a nosedive in the Tribune since he became Sports editor and I've told him as much.

[orangeman]

Those who have argued vehemently in defence of the players have had to revise their thinking before. Was it not only last week that Sean Og stated publicly that he'd have no difficulty with FM again which put paid to any notion that the biggest stumbling block in the whole was indeed gold old FM. However as soon as Gerald made way, the road was open for their preferred candidate to take the stage only for JOS to tell last Thursday's meeting that Gardiner had contacted him to inform the meeting that O'Grady was their man. In a secret ballot ( which FM had already rigged and filled in the pieces of paper during the course of Thursday afternoon ) O'Grady surprisingly lost out.

So is FM really that good that he can rig a vote even before he knws who is going to be in the vote ?

[Zulu]

I've been trying to keep from anything personal in this and offered an apology in case a certain post came across differently but yourself and reillers always seem to revert to type.

Your put upon victim routine has long since got tiresome, you can get an insult from almost any post so I'm not going to concern myself with your sensibilities any longer, if you want to feel insulted fire away.

As for Shannon his track record is one that is pro-active in favour of the 2008 panel. If his information came from any source other than the 2008 panel he would most likely have hinted at that source. It isn't unreasonable to think this was a pr exercise on behalf of that panel and by his focus on Cosidine an attempt to keep OGrady in the spotlight.

Maybe like me he fundamentally agrees with the players and he is expressing that opinion. If journalists are writing an opinion piece themn that is what it should be, not a balanced over all view of the situation.

No I don't think you'll change your opinion but I do believe you feel very awkward about the wake and funeral. But as I said if you do acknowledge that you might have to change your opinion because if it is proven that the panel's leaders sought players not to go what would that say about their integrity?

I'm not uneasy about it at all, i don't agree with everything the players do or say and I've never personally really liked this particular team but i admire them and I think they are 100% right in this situation. For me the funeral issue is just another unfortunate chapter in the whole saga buy I have no illusions about the players, I don't see them as hero's but I view the actions of teh CCB as whole unreasonable and completely at odds with their role and that is why i support the players.

Those who have argued vehemently in defence of the players have had to revise their thinking before.

OM will you give over, I've long suspected that your sole reason for posting on this issue is simply to keep it going rather than offer anything constructive. The only people who have had to change their tune are anti-player posters, from not allowing the grasssroots have their say, through to mob rule and now their no show at the funeral or the fact they'll play for FM, when he is the real problem. You've entirely abandond your argument from the first 200 odd pages and are now latching on to anything to keep posting on this issue.

[orangeman]

Zulu - you've long suspected that the 2008 panel were out to be the savious of Cork hurling and that their sole intention was to get FM out - you were wrong there as well.

[cornafean]

As for Shannon .... If journalists are writing an opinion piece then that is what it should be, not a balanced over all view of the situation.

Shannon is the Sports Editor of his paper, not an opinion columnist. If he wants to preface all his output with the word "Opinion", fine by me, but his obvious bias does no favours for either him or his paper.

[passedit]

OM will you give over, I've long suspected that your sole reason for posting on this issue is simply to keep it going rather than offer anything constructive. The only people who have had to change their tune are anti-player posters, from not allowing the grasssroots have their say, through to mob rule and now their no show at the funeral or the fact they'll play for FM, when he is the real problem. You've entirely abandond your argument from the first 200 odd pages and are now latching on to anything to keep posting on this issue.

I'm dissappointed in you zulu, do actually think that OM ever had a coherent argument?

As for the funeral, it is obvious that the players were right in their assessment that they were damned either way. Personally, I find it distasteful that anyone would use someone's death to score cheap digs in what is at end of the day a sporting dispute.

[orangeman]

It was quite distasteful alright that the 2008 would elect to score cheap digs by not going to the funeral. I have to agree with you there.

[Reillers]

Om you're a joke.
You wont even admit to doing it. The players haven't said one word about the funeral, not one word. McCarthy brought it up, Shannon let his opinion be none, but ye, ye are the ones, you, Dowling..etc ye keep harping on about the funeral trying to get digs in, trying to make the players look bad. And you wont even admit to it.