Donegal on slippery slope?

[INDIANA]

We have Donegal people saying for certain that they know people on the panel and they can say for certain that McBrearty was bitten. I've seen comments on other forums from Dublin people saying that they know the person mentioned in the Times and that they categorically deny biting anyone hence the appeal to an original sentence that was based on a referee's report. So based on that they issued a three match ban to a player and then asked him to prove his innocence and then throw out the finding of not proven again leaving room for the doubters to say ah yeah he must have done it we just can't prove it.

A fuckin shambles from start to finish and so now we have the situation whereby anyone can make an allegation against another player , provide "evidence" and then say nothing when it's dismissed

What are Donegal or McBrearty supposed to say?

If things proceeded as you and heffo indicate, the fault lies with CCCC, not them, unless, of course, they made it up, which is ludicrous.

Donegal need to take a hard look at themselves.

I wonder had they won the game would there have been a complaint?

I don't blame Mc Brearty.

There are others who need to take full responsibility for this.

They first notified the ref at halftime. When they were winning!

Of an allegation that has proven to be false.

Hard to know what credibility donegal have left to be honest.

[donegal lad]

We have Donegal people saying for certain that they know people on the panel and they can say for certain that McBrearty was bitten. I've seen comments on other forums from Dublin people saying that they know the person mentioned in the Times and that they categorically deny biting anyone hence the appeal to an original sentence that was based on a referee's report. So based on that they issued a three match ban to a player and then asked him to prove his innocence and then throw out the finding of not proven again leaving room for the doubters to say ah yeah he must have done it we just can't prove it.

A fuckin shambles from start to finish and so now we have the situation whereby anyone can make an allegation against another player , provide "evidence" and then say nothing when it's dismissed

What are Donegal or McBrearty supposed to say?

If things proceeded as you and heffo indicate, the fault lies with CCCC, not them, unless, of course, they made it up, which is ludicrous.

Donegal need to take a hard look at themselves.

I wonder had they won the game would there have been a complaint?

I don't blame Mc Brearty.

There are others who need to take full responsibility for this.

Donegal notified the ref about this at halftime when leadin he game. Never once did they name the player in reports I've seen. The only people who need take a long look at themselves is the cccc for applying the ban on obrien

[J70]

We have Donegal people saying for certain that they know people on the panel and they can say for certain that McBrearty was bitten. I've seen comments on other forums from Dublin people saying that they know the person mentioned in the Times and that they categorically deny biting anyone hence the appeal to an original sentence that was based on a referee's report. So based on that they issued a three match ban to a player and then asked him to prove his innocence and then throw out the finding of not proven again leaving room for the doubters to say ah yeah he must have done it we just can't prove it.

A fuckin shambles from start to finish and so now we have the situation whereby anyone can make an allegation against another player , provide "evidence" and then say nothing when it's dismissed

What are Donegal or McBrearty supposed to say?

If things proceeded as you and heffo indicate, the fault lies with CCCC, not them, unless, of course, they made it up, which is ludicrous.

Donegal need to take a hard look at themselves.

I wonder had they won the game would there have been a complaint?

I don't blame Mc Brearty.

There are others who need to take full responsibility for this.

They first notified the ref at halftime. When they were winning!

Of an allegation that has proven to be false.

Hard to know what credibility donegal have left to be honest.

Proven false where?

[INDIANA]

We have Donegal people saying for certain that they know people on the panel and they can say for certain that McBrearty was bitten. I've seen comments on other forums from Dublin people saying that they know the person mentioned in the Times and that they categorically deny biting anyone hence the appeal to an original sentence that was based on a referee's report. So based on that they issued a three match ban to a player and then asked him to prove his innocence and then throw out the finding of not proven again leaving room for the doubters to say ah yeah he must have done it we just can't prove it.

A fuckin shambles from start to finish and so now we have the situation whereby anyone can make an allegation against another player , provide "evidence" and then say nothing when it's dismissed

What are Donegal or McBrearty supposed to say?

If things proceeded as you and heffo indicate, the fault lies with CCCC, not them, unless, of course, they made it up, which is ludicrous.

Donegal need to take a hard look at themselves.

I wonder had they won the game would there have been a complaint?

I don't blame Mc Brearty.

There are others who need to take full responsibility for this.

Donegal notified the ref about this at halftime when leadin he game. Never once did they name the player in reports I've seen. The only people who need take a long look at themselves is the cccc for applying the ban on obrien

True for applying a ban for no evidence.

Then again we could also look back the trail and ask what was the evidence?

Because there was none.

[INDIANA]

We have Donegal people saying for certain that they know people on the panel and they can say for certain that McBrearty was bitten. I've seen comments on other forums from Dublin people saying that they know the person mentioned in the Times and that they categorically deny biting anyone hence the appeal to an original sentence that was based on a referee's report. So based on that they issued a three match ban to a player and then asked him to prove his innocence and then throw out the finding of not proven again leaving room for the doubters to say ah yeah he must have done it we just can't prove it.

A fuckin shambles from start to finish and so now we have the situation whereby anyone can make an allegation against another player , provide "evidence" and then say nothing when it's dismissed

What are Donegal or McBrearty supposed to say?

If things proceeded as you and heffo indicate, the fault lies with CCCC, not them, unless, of course, they made it up, which is ludicrous.

Donegal need to take a hard look at themselves.

I wonder had they won the game would there have been a complaint?

I don't blame Mc Brearty.

There are others who need to take full responsibility for this.

They first notified the ref at halftime. When they were winning!

Of an allegation that has proven to be false.

Hard to know what credibility donegal have left to be honest.

Proven false where?

Our player has been cleared fully.

[J70]

We have Donegal people saying for certain that they know people on the panel and they can say for certain that McBrearty was bitten. I've seen comments on other forums from Dublin people saying that they know the person mentioned in the Times and that they categorically deny biting anyone hence the appeal to an original sentence that was based on a referee's report. So based on that they issued a three match ban to a player and then asked him to prove his innocence and then throw out the finding of not proven again leaving room for the doubters to say ah yeah he must have done it we just can't prove it.

A fuckin shambles from start to finish and so now we have the situation whereby anyone can make an allegation against another player , provide "evidence" and then say nothing when it's dismissed

What are Donegal or McBrearty supposed to say?

If things proceeded as you and heffo indicate, the fault lies with CCCC, not them, unless, of course, they made it up, which is ludicrous.

Donegal need to take a hard look at themselves.

I wonder had they won the game would there have been a complaint?

I don't blame Mc Brearty.

There are others who need to take full responsibility for this.

They first notified the ref at halftime. When they were winning!

Of an allegation that has proven to be false.

Hard to know what credibility donegal have left to be honest.

Proven false where?

Our player has been cleared fully.

Does not mean the bite didn't happen.

[INDIANA]

We have Donegal people saying for certain that they know people on the panel and they can say for certain that McBrearty was bitten. I've seen comments on other forums from Dublin people saying that they know the person mentioned in the Times and that they categorically deny biting anyone hence the appeal to an original sentence that was based on a referee's report. So based on that they issued a three match ban to a player and then asked him to prove his innocence and then throw out the finding of not proven again leaving room for the doubters to say ah yeah he must have done it we just can't prove it.

A fuckin shambles from start to finish and so now we have the situation whereby anyone can make an allegation against another player , provide "evidence" and then say nothing when it's dismissed

What are Donegal or McBrearty supposed to say?

If things proceeded as you and heffo indicate, the fault lies with CCCC, not them, unless, of course, they made it up, which is ludicrous.

Donegal need to take a hard look at themselves.

I wonder had they won the game would there have been a complaint?

I don't blame Mc Brearty.

There are others who need to take full responsibility for this.

They first notified the ref at halftime. When they were winning!

Of an allegation that has proven to be false.

Hard to know what credibility donegal have left to be honest.

Proven false where?

Our player has been cleared fully.

Does not mean the bite didn't happen.

There was no evidence it did happen.

If there had been the verdict would be different.

Hard to know where you go from here.

[J70]

We have Donegal people saying for certain that they know people on the panel and they can say for certain that McBrearty was bitten. I've seen comments on other forums from Dublin people saying that they know the person mentioned in the Times and that they categorically deny biting anyone hence the appeal to an original sentence that was based on a referee's report. So based on that they issued a three match ban to a player and then asked him to prove his innocence and then throw out the finding of not proven again leaving room for the doubters to say ah yeah he must have done it we just can't prove it.

A fuckin shambles from start to finish and so now we have the situation whereby anyone can make an allegation against another player , provide "evidence" and then say nothing when it's dismissed

What are Donegal or McBrearty supposed to say?

If things proceeded as you and heffo indicate, the fault lies with CCCC, not them, unless, of course, they made it up, which is ludicrous.

Donegal need to take a hard look at themselves.

I wonder had they won the game would there have been a complaint?

I don't blame Mc Brearty.

There are others who need to take full responsibility for this.

They first notified the ref at halftime. When they were winning!

Of an allegation that has proven to be false.

Hard to know what credibility donegal have left to be honest.

Proven false where?

Our player has been cleared fully.

Does not mean the bite didn't happen.

There was no evidence it did happen.

If there had been the verdict would be different.

Hard to know where you go from here.

The verdict was "not proven". In reference to whether O'Brien bit McBrearty. Not "there was no bite".

[J70]

Let's say there was only one or two cameras, not 26, at Anfield on Sunday and they didn't pick up Suarez's bite. No one else noticed, following the game action instead. Ivanovic had no marks, as was the case. Would he and Chelsea be liars and cheats for bringing it to the referee's attention, as some here are claiming of Donegal?

[Zulu]

So you're saying O'Brien did bite him and that O'Brien appealed knowing he bit him but took the chance that nobody saw it or caught it on a camera phone?

[J70]

So you're saying O'Brien did bite him and that O'Brien appealed knowing he bit him but took the chance that nobody saw it or caught it on a camera phone?

I haven't said a word about O'Brien.

The question was about the claims that Donegal and McBrearty made it up.

[Zulu]

So you're saying O'Brien did bite him and that O'Brien appealed knowing he bit him but took the chance that nobody saw it or caught it on a camera phone?

I haven't said a word about O'Brien.

The question was about the claims that Donegal and McBrearty made it up.

You said if Chelsea claimed Suarez's bit their player, and since O'Brien was accused I presume he had an accuser, that Suarez might have appealed his suspension (like O'Brien) if there were only 2 cameras present and he was confident he wasn't caught by either camera. So Suarez was guilty but he wasn't caught due to lack of cameras and that this is what actually happened with O'Brien.

[INDIANA]

Let's say there was only one or two cameras, not 26, at Anfield on Sunday and they didn't pick up Suarez's bite. No one else noticed, following the game action instead. Ivanovic had no marks, as was the case. Would he and Chelsea be liars and cheats for bringing it to the referee's attention, as some here are claiming of Donegal?

I'm very comfortable stating there has been some appalling lies in this case.

Appalling.

As far as I'm concerned Donegal ought to be utterly ashamed of themselves.

[stephenite]

I don't imagine for one second that someone has made up an allegation that they were bitten by a Dublin player. I cannot accept that.

That the process that followed turned into a shambles is not the fault of either county.

But I'm still pretty sure someone was bitten.

[INDIANA]

I don't imagine for one second that someone has made up an allegation that they were bitten by a Dublin player. I cannot accept that.

That the process that followed turned into a shambles is not the fault of either county.

But I'm still pretty sure someone was bitten.

Conjecture.

Utterly zero evidence to support that

Do you believe in the Twilight Zone as a matter of interest? No evidence to support that either.