Donegal on slippery slope?

[haranguerer]

Christ I thought you were taking the piss squire. Seriously, has it been dropped?

There's no way a player invented this, got his team to back him, called in the other teams doctor to see the evidence, have the GAA review the case and decide there was enough to charge the player, for it to have been made up. But if this is the case (which it isn't) then I hope to see Donegal being reprimanded now?? One side must be right after all. Or has everyone agreed to sweep it under the carpet??

[INDIANA]

Christ I thought you were taking the piss squire. Seriously, has it been dropped?

There's no way a player invented this, got his team to back him, called in the other teams doctor to see the evidence, have the GAA review the case and decide there was enough to charge the player, for it to have been made up. But if this is the case (which it isn't) then I hope to see Donegal being reprimanded now?? One side must be right after all. Or has everyone agreed to sweep it under the carpet??

No-one has swept anything under the carpet.

There is one side right all right. And how do you know what happened anyway? Did you see it?- no you didn't

So if I were you I'd keep my opinions to myself lest you look like a complete plonker later on.

[Hound]

Christ I thought you were taking the piss squire. Seriously, has it been dropped?

There's no way a player invented this, got his team to back him, called in the other teams doctor to see the evidence, have the GAA review the case and decide there was enough to charge the player, for it to have been made up. But if this is the case (which it isn't) then I hope to see Donegal being reprimanded now?? One side must be right after all. Or has everyone agreed to sweep it under the carpet??

There's lots of rumours going around, most of them untrue I'd guess. Would they really have done a teeth mould and compare it to the wound? - Personally I don't believe that. 

Other rumours going around was that the Times had named the wrong player - again I don't believe that. As an aside it is strange that the Times are the only ones (I think) to have named him (on two separate occassions), but in their article today they talked about the incident without naming him.

The one I've heard most is that McBrearty wants nothing to do with the case, and the reason the hearing has been put back from Monday to Wednesday then to Thursday was that people were trying to persuade him to take part.  Again, all rumours, I don't know any facts.

The secrecy around what exactly is going on is very puzzling to me.

[Fuzzman]

The whole thing really is strange and I am particular surprised by how no statement has come out from Donegal or especially McGuinness.

So from what we know, is it fair to say that there was bite marks but we don't know from who and that McBrearty isn't keen to name the player involved. Is that where its at?

It's probably not a good thing to have hanging over McBrearty going into the Tyrone game so you'd imagine he wants closure on it one way or the other.

[INDIANA]

The whole thing really is strange and I am particular surprised by how no statement has come out from Donegal or especially McGuinness.

So from what we know, is it fair to say that there was bite marks but we don't know from who and that McBrearty isn't keen to name the player involved. Is that where its at?

It's probably not a good thing to have hanging over McBrearty going into the Tyrone game so you'd imagine he wants closure on it one way or the other.

How do you know there were  bite marks?

[Fuzzman]

I didn't see them myself Indi but that's what I'm digging to confirm from what we've been told so far.
Did the Donegal doctor or board not say they have photo graphs showing a bite mark or did they just say they've photos showing a bruise/laceration/whatever?

I'm just trying to get an understanding for where are we all at in our beliefs to what has been actually established?

So from your reply I take it you're not convinced there was even a bite at all, is that right or are you just being cautious?

[J70]

The whole thing really is strange and I am particular surprised by how no statement has come out from Donegal or especially McGuinness.

So from what we know, is it fair to say that there was bite marks but we don't know from who and that McBrearty isn't keen to name the player involved. Is that where its at?

It's probably not a good thing to have hanging over McBrearty going into the Tyrone game so you'd imagine he wants closure on it one way or the other.

How do you know there were  bite marks?

I would think that the fact that the CCCC said there was a case to answer must have been based on some kind of conclusive evidence.  Someone should obviously have made sure McBrearty was willing to see it through though, if that is why the case was dismissed.

[screenexile]

The whole thing really is strange and I am particular surprised by how no statement has come out from Donegal or especially McGuinness.

So from what we know, is it fair to say that there was bite marks but we don't know from who and that McBrearty isn't keen to name the player involved. Is that where its at?

It's probably not a good thing to have hanging over McBrearty going into the Tyrone game so you'd imagine he wants closure on it one way or the other.

How do you know there were  bite marks?

The GAA's Central Competition Controls Committee have initiated an investigation into the allegations made that Donegal forward Paddy McBrearty was bitten in Sunday's Division 1 clash with Dublin in Ballybofey.

The CCCC have been in contact with Donegal, looking for any evidence or information they might have in relation to the claims made at half-time and full-time by Donegal officials that one of their players had sustained a laceration to his shoulder which subsequently required hospital examination in Letterkenny.

It is believed that Donegal have photographs showing the wound in question just after the game and will also be able to draw on reports from the examination conducted by their own medical personnel and from the hospital.

McBrearty had a number of precautionary injections on Sunday night.

Donegal officials reported the alleged incident to referee Padraig Hughes at the interval, while his replacement Michael Duffy was also informed at the end of the match.

That detail subsequently made its way into the official report on the match and this is what has triggered the probe.

It is understood that McBrearty himself is not keen to press the matter and wants to put it behind him as he prepares for tonight's Ulster U-21 final against Cavan in Enniskillen.

Dublin chairman Andy Kettle confirmed yesterday that a member of their medical staff was invited into the Donegal dressing-room to examine McBrearty. Kettle said the medic had suggested that, in his estimation, it was "a bruise, not a laceration."

Kettle also expressed his disappointment that Donegal had not made direct contact with Dublin County Board on the matter and he disputed that there had been contact with the Dublin management on the day of the game.

"I have spoken to Jim Gavin and he was not made aware of it by his counterpart or any of the Donegal management team," said Kettle.

"That is the point I would take issue with in radio reports at the moment that the Dublin management team were informed.

"The Dublin management team, to my knowledge, were not informed."

I'm not saying I know what's gone on but Donegal said they had evidence. If you have more information Indiana why don't you just let us know what the story is?!

[Fuzzman]

I'm just curious but are some of ye Dublin lads still wondering was the whole thing made up or in some way staged and that no Dublin player did anything?

Or would ye admit that something took place caused by a Dublin player but proving who is the issue at hand?

[Zulu]

Don't know what the story is but the lads on reservoirdubs are adamant that this has been one big farce. The recent posts of Indiana would seem to reflect this here so if true Donegal are going to come out of this very badly, as will the GAA.

This is a really strange case and one that seems to have been badly handled by the GAA whatever the truth.

[orangeman]

Jimmy's winning mindgames.

[Zulu]

Losing this one.....badly, if rumours are true.

[orangeman]

Losing this one.....badly, if rumours are true.

Hopefully.

[orangeman]

Dublin's Kevin O'Brien will not face any sanction over allegations he had bitten Donegal's Paddy McBrearty during a recent NFL Division One match in Ballybofey.

The Dublin defender was cleared at a hearing of the GAA's Central Hearings Committee at Croke Park last night with the case against O'Brien "not proven".

The Central Competitions Control Committee (CCCC) had initially proposed a three-match suspension for O'Brien following allegations from Donegal. However, the 2012 under-21 All-Ireland winning captain immediately indicated his intention to contest the ban and following last night's hearing he will be free to play in Sunday's Division One league final against Tyrone

"Following a meeting of An Lár Choiste Éisteachta, it was decided that on the basis of the evidence provided and the submissions made on behalf of both parties, the infraction against Kevin O'Brien (Dublin) as alleged was not proven," the GAA explained in a statement this morning, "and that the disciplinary action against the defending party is at an end."

[orangeman]

So there wasn't as much concrete evidence as Donegal had reckoned.

Embarassing end to the matter.