Donegal on slippery slope?

[muppet]

Post retracted! Was having a bad day

The internet does that to us sometimes.

[Main Street]

McGuinness "We followed the procedures then, we wanted him to go to the hearing, I wanted him to go to the hearing, and the county board wanted him to go to the hearing, but Patrick didn't want to go to the hearing."

If McGuinness had a bit more common sense, he would not have contemplated any of his players going to this CCCC hearing to give evidence against another, never mind a teenager. What was he thinking! 

[DuffleKing]

Surprised he didn't back McBrearty publicly here. Hanging him out to dry a bit saying what he did

[BluestackBoy]

Surprised he didn't back McBrearty publicly here. Hanging him out to dry a bit saying what he did

I guess he was trying to be honest. If he did as you suggest he would be lambasted for spinning & lying & everything short of beating up old ladies. Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't.

[J70]

Shock and Horror, Donegal are victims again........

What is this supposed to mean?

[Zulu]

Paraic Duffy on the radio now clearly states there was a bite but also says there wasn't any evidence bar the accusation from McBrearty which appears confusing to me. More importantly if that was what the whole case rested on then why was there a proposed ban at all. Surely we can't have proposed bans on players based on an accusation from another. The fact he stated there was a bite would suggest there was physical evidence of a bite but the fact he claims it fell apart due to lack of evidence implies there wasn't ever enough there to proceed to banning a player. A farce.

[Jinxy]

I'm a bit tired of all this now.

[donegal lad]

Paraic Duffy on the radio now clearly states there was a bite but also says there wasn't any evidence bar the accusation from McBrearty which appears confusing to me. More importantly if that was what the whole case rested on then why was there a proposed ban at all. Surely we can't have proposed bans on players based on an accusation from another. The fact he stated there was a bite would suggest there was physical evidence of a bite but the fact he claims it fell apart due to lack of evidence implies there wasn't ever enough there to proceed to banning a player. A farce.

Glad to see someone has backed up what I've been sayin since the start. He was bit but was never any evidence to say who bit him and it was the cccc who made a mess of all ts by proposing a ban at all

[seafoid]

I'm a bit tired of all this now.

It could beat the Cork hurlers thread yet. All you need is a persecution complex and time.

[muppet]

I'm a bit tired of all this now.

It could beat the Cork hurlers thread yet. All you need is a persecution complex and time.

Will no one think of the children GPA?

[Orchardman]

As i thought, we now know for definate THERE WAS A BITE.

All we need now is for the dubs to ban their player, unless it was a donegal player that bit him?

[orangeman]

Paraic Duffy on the radio now clearly states there was a bite but also says there wasn't any evidence bar the accusation from McBrearty which appears confusing to me. More importantly if that was what the whole case rested on then why was there a proposed ban at all. Surely we can't have proposed bans on players based on an accusation from another. The fact he stated there was a bite would suggest there was physical evidence of a bite but the fact he claims it fell apart due to lack of evidence implies there wasn't ever enough there to proceed to banning a player. A farce.

A farce of the highest order.

But as Liam said, all the CCC lads, or most of them are volunteers, they come in to do their job to the best of their ability and go home again -vit's everybody else's fault. Nothing to do with the poor CCC.

What were they thinking of banning him in the first instance if there was zero evidence ?

We're they hoping Dublin would sit up and take it on the chin ?

[trileacman]

Paraic Duffy on the radio now clearly states there was a bite but also says there wasn't any evidence bar the accusation from McBrearty which appears confusing to me. More importantly if that was what the whole case rested on then why was there a proposed ban at all. Surely we can't have proposed bans on players based on an accusation from another. The fact he stated there was a bite would suggest there was physical evidence of a bite but the fact he claims it fell apart due to lack of evidence implies there wasn't ever enough there to proceed to banning a player. A farce.

A farce of the highest order.

But as Liam said, all the CCC lads, or most of them are volunteers, they come in to do their job to the best of their ability and go home again -vit's everybody else's fault. Nothing to do with the poor CCC.

What were they thinking of banning him in the first instance if there was zero evidence ?

We're they hoping Dublin would sit up and take it on the chin ?

I think it's a case of them asking McBearty to come to the hearing to reiterate his evidence or else to be cross examined or something. When he refused to show it looked as if he wasn't committed to seeing the process out.

When the injured party didn't see enough reason to see through the process they why should the CHC? O'Brien was cleared and I think the CHC or CCC didn't do a whole pile wrong.  Either O'Brien bit him or McBearty made it up. I don't see the CCC as the problem here.

You've got to stop seeing it as a court of law, its more like a school headmasters office. McBearty told the teacher O'Brien bit him and when the two were sent down to see the principal McBearty refused to reiterate the allegation and no-one is punished.

[J70]

As i thought, we now know for definate THERE WAS A BITE.

All we need now is for the dubs to ban their player, unless it was a donegal player that bit him?

Maybe it was McGuinness. That man will stop at nothing when weaving his evil spells to gain Donegal some obscure, perceived advantage.   

[orangeman]

Here's the "facts" according to Duffy - a player was bitten in an Allianz league game.



GAA director general Paraic Duffy has said it's a matter of record that Donegal footballer Paddy McBrearty was bitten during the controversial league match against Dublin in April.


Defending the association's handling of the incident in the wake of criticism last week from Donegal manager Jim McGuinness, Duffy admitted it was damaging for the GAA that a player was bitten and nobody was held to account for it.

Speaking at the launch of RTE's coverage of the 2013 championships Duffy said the comments of GAA president Liam O'Neill on the matter, which were criticised by McGuinness, were "absolutely fair".

McGuinness was responding to O'Neill's expression of disappointment at the failure of all the evidence on the case not being presented to the Central Hearings Committee meeting that cleared a Dublin player of a three-game suspension proposed by the Central Competition Controls Committee, who investigated the allegation.

"I understand Jim McGuinness' concern for his player. I absolutely understand that," said Duffy.

"I think the comments Liam made in the aftermath were absolutely fair. I think it is important to put it into context.

"To put a few facts on the record. A player was bitten in an Allianz League game. That's not good for the association.

"Unfortunately it wasn't picked up on video, TV or by the match officials. It was put into the public domain and the CCCC tried to investigate it as best they could and did," added Duffy.