Donegal on slippery slope?

[BluestackBoy]

Your "we deserved to get relegated" comment added to the general tenor of your contributions leads me to believe that you are not a Donegal man at all but a troll masquerading as one of Tir Conaill's best.

I presume that you want Inis Eoghain's best included in your squad come the 26th too? 

Yes please

[muppet]

Whatever about the McKeever case I could agree with O'Neill here. Donegal made a case of the alleged bite and went to the CCCC with it, then Donegal/McBearty drop it before the final hearing and the GAA can do nothing but declare the accused innocent.

If Donegal weren't happy to see the case through to the end then they shouldn't have bothered bringing it up in the first place. No fault of the CCCC

As I understand it the CCCC acted on foot of the referee's report not at Donegal's request.

And who brought the referee's attention to the matter?

[Whitnail]

Would be a bit concerned alright.

From a betting perspective I'd put Tyrone as favourites at the moment to win Ulster even though they were 7/2 with powers a few weeks ago.

Not much time to get a new gameplan into action considering everyone knows the old one inside out by now.

Alot of predictable long balls up to Murphy and seemingly few reliable scoring options outside him and McFadden.

Back door option looms large I feel. Tyrone would need to have a bad day . Even with an extra man they were well better than us in the league game.

I have to assume that you are a Donegal man from your use of the word "us". If that is the case then your knowledge of Donegal's tactics in championship games is lamentable. You state that everyone knows their "old" gameplan. A wee test for you then, explain it.
As for the league game, that was a league game, in winter, in Omagh, a world of difference from a championship game, in summer in Ballybofey.

You want me to explain their tactics.

I presume you ask this for your own benefit? A 6 year old girl from Laois can do that for you if you ask them nicely .So drop the 'Superiority' complex right there sunny.

I not one of those yellow and green glass tainted yes men who have nothing to add to a conversation other than 'we're better than yous' 'It'll be a different game in ballybofey' 'Donegal don't care about the Leauge' guff.

From  what I've read from your posts that's pretty much what I'm getting from you  .No offence.

Am I concerned? Yes

Why wouldn't anyone. We deserved to get relegated and Tyrone have  been gelling and playing at a superior level .

The reason I asked you to explain their tactics, which I notice you didn't, is because there isn't just one set of tactics. Donegal, in championship mode, employ a range of tactics & strategies depending on the situation in which they find themselves. I have no doubt that they will have something in mind for the challenge Tyrone will put up but it will not be the same as what they used against Mayo because they are different teams with different strengths & weaknesses. Will it be enough, who knows?

Your "we deserved to get relegated" comment added to the general tenor of your contributions leads me to believe that you are not a Donegal man at all but a troll masquerading as one of Tir Conaill's best.

By the way "sunny" should be sonny, "tainted" should be tinted & "leauge" should be league. No Donegal man would post such a sloppy effort!!

Oh sweet Jesus Christ ...stop please while your behind.

Who are you?

Do you really think I'm going to do your private 'initiation' 'test' on tatics on an internet forum so as to 'earn' the privilege to support my own county?


'Donegal employ a wide range of tactics' - no shit Sherlock

If your worried about my allegiance email me ffs and I'll send you a photo of me outside  my workplace with my DL car .If you want I can have a newspaper with tomorrows date highlighted  for you!


Talk to me about our tactics from the front forward line to the back line .Dont skip the Leauge games . I expect you to know and highlight the problems especially against Cork and Mayo. Don't just concentrate on last year's championship.

I will then tell you where your wrong and I won't hold back.

Put in the legwork 'sunny'.
Prove your not some little keyboard warrior or some defensive little sycophant who's idea of supporting his county is based on 'I'm a better supporter than you cause Donegal people only say positive defensive things about our team and players '

Jesus that's for the Dubs ,some of them seemingly here can't admit there boy obviously did SOMETHING wrong.

[BluestackBoy]

Would be a bit concerned alright.

From a betting perspective I'd put Tyrone as favourites at the moment to win Ulster even though they were 7/2 with powers a few weeks ago.

Not much time to get a new gameplan into action considering everyone knows the old one inside out by now.

Alot of predictable long balls up to Murphy and seemingly few reliable scoring options outside him and McFadden.

Back door option looms large I feel. Tyrone would need to have a bad day . Even with an extra man they were well better than us in the league game.

I have to assume that you are a Donegal man from your use of the word "us". If that is the case then your knowledge of Donegal's tactics in championship games is lamentable. You state that everyone knows their "old" gameplan. A wee test for you then, explain it.
As for the league game, that was a league game, in winter, in Omagh, a world of difference from a championship game, in summer in Ballybofey.

You want me to explain their tactics.

I presume you ask this for your own benefit? A 6 year old girl from Laois can do that for you if you ask them nicely .So drop the 'Superiority' complex right there sunny.

I not one of those yellow and green glass tainted yes men who have nothing to add to a conversation other than 'we're better than yous' 'It'll be a different game in ballybofey' 'Donegal don't care about the Leauge' guff.

From  what I've read from your posts that's pretty much what I'm getting from you  .No offence.

Am I concerned? Yes

Why wouldn't anyone. We deserved to get relegated and Tyrone have  been gelling and playing at a superior level .

The reason I asked you to explain their tactics, which I notice you didn't, is because there isn't just one set of tactics. Donegal, in championship mode, employ a range of tactics & strategies depending on the situation in which they find themselves. I have no doubt that they will have something in mind for the challenge Tyrone will put up but it will not be the same as what they used against Mayo because they are different teams with different strengths & weaknesses. Will it be enough, who knows?

Your "we deserved to get relegated" comment added to the general tenor of your contributions leads me to believe that you are not a Donegal man at all but a troll masquerading as one of Tir Conaill's best.

By the way "sunny" should be sonny, "tainted" should be tinted & "leauge" should be league. No Donegal man would post such a sloppy effort!!

Oh sweet Jesus Christ ...stop please while your behind.

Who are you?

Do you really think I'm going to do your private 'initiation' 'test' on tatics on an internet forum so as to 'earn' the privilege to support my own county?


'Donegal employ a wide range of tactics' - no shit Sherlock

If your worried about my allegiance email me ffs and I'll send you a photo of me outside  my workplace with my DL car .If you want I can have a newspaper with tomorrows date highlighted  for you!


Talk to me about our tactics from the front forward line to the back line .Dont skip the Leauge games . I expect you to know and highlight the problems especially against Cork and Mayo. Don't just concentrate on last year's championship.

I will then tell you where your wrong and I won't hold back.

Put in the legwork 'sunny'.
Prove your not some little keyboard warrior or some defensive little sycophant who's idea of supporting his county is based on 'I'm a better supporter than you cause Donegal people only say positive defensive things about our team and players '

Jesus that's for the Dubs ,some of them seemingly here can't admit there boy obviously did SOMETHING wrong.

The problem is that I have seen no evidence at all of you supporting your county. If the couple of posts you have put up here are evidence of your "support" then all I can say is that it's a new definition of the word support.
Of course I will refer to the championship, that's the competition we are coming into now & it's a whole different ball game to the league. Jim has a full deck to pick from, they will be fully fit, which means that the intensity will be there & focused on the targets they had set themselves from the beginning of the year, namely 3 Ulster titles in a row and defend their AI title.
Can they do it? Maybe, maybe not. The odds are against them as there are many fine teams out there, Tyrone being one of them & only one can win.

[Main Street]

Pretty clear that he's saying that had McBrearty agreed to testify, the outcome would have been different.

I don't read it like that at all to be honest. I read it that because he never turned up to give his evidence, the full facts couldn't come out.

You are correct.

And I think McBrearty was right not to give evidence. One player should not put himself in the situation of testifying against another in such a CCCC procedure. If there isn't enough (other) evidence and the charged player denies it, then it should be dropped.
There was a farce some years ago in an end of season EPL game when Alan Shearer blatantly booted  a prone Neil Lennon in the face.
The ref  said he "missed it" but Shearer was charged afterwards and Lennon was called to testify. What was he going to say other than it appeared accidental and he hardly felt it. Immediately afterwards  Lennon said that the ref should have had the balls to deal with it at the time and he wasn't interested in being a part of this process, or words to that effect.

That makes no sense. So McBearty is right to accuse O'Brien of biting but shouldn't have to follow through on those accusations in a manner that O'Brien can defend himself?

Or the ref should have dealt with it at the time? "Ref he bit me" and send O'Brien off at half-time?

You're from Tyrone?? perhaps don't jumble all the information together, before you try to make some sense of things
The ref made a report after the game, follow the report and you'll see where the charges arise.

[BluestackBoy]

Pretty clear that he's saying that had McBrearty agreed to testify, the outcome would have been different.

I don't read it like that at all to be honest. I read it that because he never turned up to give his evidence, the full facts couldn't come out.

You are correct.

And I think McBrearty was right not to give evidence. One player should not put himself in the situation of testifying against another in such a CCCC procedure. If there isn't enough (other) evidence and the charged player denies it, then it should be dropped.
There was a farce some years ago in an end of season EPL game when Alan Shearer blatantly booted  a prone Neil Lennon in the face.
The ref  said he "missed it" but Shearer was charged afterwards and Lennon was called to testify. What was he going to say other than it appeared accidental and he hardly felt it. Immediately afterwards  Lennon said that the ref should have had the balls to deal with it at the time and he wasn't interested in being a part of this process, or words to that effect.

That makes no sense. So McBearty is right to accuse O'Brien of biting but shouldn't have to follow through on those accusations in a manner that O'Brien can defend himself?

Or the ref should have dealt with it at the time? "Ref he bit me" and send O'Brien off at half-time?

You're from Tyrone?? perhaps don't jumble all the information together, before you try to make some sense of things
The ref made a report after the game, follow the report and you'll see where the charges arise.

As far as Donegal were concerned a serious biting offence took place which warranted reporting to the referee. After that it was up to the authorities to investigate. Without independent evidence it should not have gone as far as it did,  Donegal& McBrearty in particular did not want to be involved in a he did/he didn't scenario and so refused to get involved.

[orangeman]

Martin Breheny– 01 May 2013

Interesting take here -

BITEGATE is over, but has left a sour taste in several mouths. Croke Park are frustrated because the case made by their investigating committee against Dublin defender Kevin O'Brien effectively collapsed when Donegal's Paddy McBrearty didn't show for a disciplinary hearing.



Donegal are unhappy that what they regard as a serious attack on McBrearty has gone unpunished and Dublin are concerned that one of its players had his reputation impugned by what eventually turned out to be an unsubstantiated accusation from rivals. They are pleased that O'Brien was cleared, but remain surprised that a charge was brought in the first place on the basis of an allegation from Donegal.

The issue of reputation is important. Croke Park, county boards or disciplinary committees are collective entities, so if one or all of them get something wrong, it can be dismissed as a systems failure. Alternatively, the blame can be hand-passed among them.

However, an allegation made against a player can stick, even if unproven. In O'Brien's case, that's most unfortunate since it involves biting. Officially, he is in the clear, his character unblemished and the matter closed.

Linked

Yet, his name has been linked with a biting incident, arising from the proposal by the GAA's Central Competitions Control Committee that he be banned for three games.

O'Brien chose not to accept the suspension and brought his case to the Central Hearings Committee, which cleared him on the basis that "the infraction as alleged was not proven."

The question is, how could it ever be proven once O'Brien denied it? In the absence of video evidence or independent eye-witnesses, how could any case be legitimately prosecuted?

The GAA has indicated their annoyance over McBrearty's failure to attend the hearing.

President Liam O'Neill didn't name McBrearty or Donegal, but it was pretty clear whom he was talking about on Monday when he said: "Our system worked the best it could. A decision was made, based on the evidence in front of CCCC, and a penalty recommended. People who had evidence didn't show. There's nothing we can do about it. If left people who acted in good faith with an outcome which wasn't satisfactory. The ideal thing would have been that, having set the wheels in motion, the process would have seen it through."


Without McBrearty, the CCCC case was fatally flawed, irrespective of what written submissions were available. McBrearty could not be compelled to travel to Croke Park for the meeting and, presumably, wasn't keen on being the star witness for the prosecution case.

But what if he had attended and offered evidence against O'Brien? What weight would it have carried, unless independently corroborated?

Against that background, this was always going to be a very difficult case, something Croke Park knew from the start. However, the CCCC proceeded on the basis of the evidence available to them. They also wanted to avoid being accused of not investigating a serious allegation.

They would have known that there was a strong possibility it would not survive the CHC stage, even if McBrearty gave evidence against O'Brien. Still, CCCC felt that they had to discharge their responsibility, based on what was in front of them.

The case is now completed, but not forgotten, because some disquieting aspects linger on. Was McBrearty bitten? If so, by whom? If Donegal weren't going to be in a position to provide all the necessary evidence to advance the case – including McBrearty's appearance at a disciplinary hearing – why complain in the first place? Is it not unfair to impugn an opponent, but then fail to support the case by ensuring that everything is in order on their side? That includes having McBrearty at the hearing.

Why did the CCCC propose a ban on the basis of conflicting evidence? It led to the emergence of a player's name in connection with a serious offence which the CCCC couldn't make stick at the first point of inquiry (the CHC meeting). O'Brien has been totally exonerated, but has had his name linked to a biting offence which is not what any player wants.

The lesson from all of this is that there's no point in taking on a case unless either video or other independent evidence (preferably both) are available. Otherwise, the disciplinary system becomes compromised through no fault of its procedures, which, in theory, are solid.

Bite or no bite, that leaves a bitter taste.

[J70]

Breheny makes good points, but why question Donegal raising the issue with the ref? Are you supposed to wait around now for a few days and see if some third party evidence shows up before making a complaint? That's bollocks! The GAA disciplinary process is where the fault lies. Donegal were perfectly within their rights to voice their concerns.

[BluestackBoy]

Breheny makes good points, but why question Donegal raising the issue with the ref? Are you supposed to wait around now for a few days and see if some third party evidence shows up before making a complaint? That's bollocks! The GAA disciplinary process is where the fault lies. Donegal were perfectly within their rights to voice their concerns.

Spot on J70

[Fuzzman]

I think it was fair enough that they reported it to the ref to let him know but what I can't understand is why was McBrearty so reluctant to then come forward and give his side of the story. What is he scared of or did he change his mind. If he did he could have just told the authorities so and not be wasting their time.

To me McBrearty's silence is the strangest part of all this.

[rosnarun]

I think it was fair enough that they reported it to the ref to let him know but what I can't understand is why was McBrearty so reluctant to then come forward and give his side of the story. What is he scared of or did he change his mind. If he did he could have just told the authorities so and not be wasting their time.

To me McBrearty's silence is the strangest part of all this.

looks like his bluff was called and he hadnt a leg to stand one .
type of tactic you come to expect from mcguinness and his tony Quinn style of management

[J70]

I think it was fair enough that they reported it to the ref to let him know but what I can't understand is why was McBrearty so reluctant to then come forward and give his side of the story. What is he scared of or did he change his mind. If he did he could have just told the authorities so and not be wasting their time.

To me McBrearty's silence is the strangest part of all this.

Read back a few weeks on the thread. McBrearty wanted to move on from the start. It was clear by the Tuesday that he wanted to concentrate on the U-21 final and forget about it. I can only assume that they thought they could bring him around, but I don't it think takes any great insight to imagine why a 19 year old kid would be reluctant to take part.. Even so, it was always his word against O'Brien's in the absence of third party evidence or a matching bite pattern, which is where Breheny is spot on. Some of us said this that first week.

[J70]

I think it was fair enough that they reported it to the ref to let him know but what I can't understand is why was McBrearty so reluctant to then come forward and give his side of the story. What is he scared of or did he change his mind. If he did he could have just told the authorities so and not be wasting their time.

To me McBrearty's silence is the strangest part of all this.

looks like his bluff was called and he hadnt a leg to stand one .
type of tactic you come to expect from mcguinness and his tony Quinn style of management

Uh-huh...

[Fuzzman]

According to the Irish Times Donegal officials turned up for the hearing.

"But it was an embarrassment for Donegal, whose officials had driven the process and attended the hearing even in the absence of the star witness. It was also a set back for the principle of standing up against what you believe to be unacceptable"

So like you said J70, it sounds like Donegal believed they had a strong enough case as also stated by Liam O'Neill but they needed young McBrearty to show up himself. Whilst I agree it might be a hard decision for some young players, surely they should have got it sorted amongst themselves before letting it go that far.

Is is the fact he doesn't wanna be seen as a whistleblower on a fellow player or what was it that he was worried about? I think the way it ended up actually makes him look worse now as he's let his own county board and management team down.
Could Donegal not have just said they don't want to follow it up a day or two after the game when they realised McBrearty had a change of heart.

In my head I still believe there was some sort of an incident that O'Brien or whoever has got away but of course nobody knows for sure except the two players involved.

[J70]

Yes, Donegal officials didn't cover themselves in glory in this, but I'm assuming they thought they'd persuade McBrearty in the end. I would personally think he was indeed reluctant to be seen blowing the whistle, but that's just speculation, even if its the most understandable and likely scenario.  As for Donegal dropping it that initial week, does a team have that option? Does the referee's report not set the wheels in motion?