Paddywagon Attacked Again

[Evil Genius]

But whilst I acknowledge that the elephant in our front room is still liable to crap everywhere if given a chance, it seems to me that during your brief sojourn on OWC, you refused even to admit that there is an elephant anywhere within 100 miles of the GAA, never mind that it might be causing bother locally. In that respect, you seemed to me to be different from most other posters who come onto OWC to defend the GAA (and don't feel so "bombarded" that they feel forced to "retreat").

Harsh and not wholly true.  The were admissions of issues on his part, not many admittedly and I personally would concede more ground.  However as I pointed out here recently such admissions are not sufficient in the context of an OWC debate on the GAA.  In fact it would appear to rebut any criticism is taken as a rebuttal of the elephants (and all other beasts in the vicinity).  Such ground rules put anyone fighting the GAA corner in an impossible position.  

By all means question His Holiness for his behaviour but don't paint this tolerant utopia where all "reasonable" GAA supporters are welcome to rational debate.

/Jim.

Tbf, I should avoid giving the impression that His Holiness sought to make a blanket defence of every criticism the GAA received, in a kind of "My country right or wrong" sort of way. And I'm sorry to say that some of the attacks on him and/or his arguments were intemperate, to say the least.

But in the end, for all his willingness to help sweep up the elephant droppings (e.g. Rule 21, Darren Graham, contentious club names etc), he still failed to recognise and/or accept that these are merely the symptoms  of the GAA's problem, and not the problem itself (i.e. the "elephant").

And that elephant, whose very existence so many GAA figures, from Nicky Brennan downwards, seem to deny, is that the GAA has signally failed to attract any significant participation, support or even interest, from a whole community of 1 million Irish people (i.e. Unionists in NI).

Now reasonable Unionists, even some on OWC(!), would accept that some of the responsibility for this is down to suspicion and antagonism from amongst their ranks towards the GAA, often deriving from ignorance or prejudice. However, throughout his entire posts on OWC, His Holiness seemed never to accept the corollary, namely that the GAA must also bear its share of the responsiblity for what everyone seems to agree, publicly at least, is a regrettable state of affairs. And that's before we even get to the point that if this is ever going to change, it is the GAA  which must make the first move, since people who are not even members of the organisation have neither the right nor the ability to make the necessary changes.

At which point, if we can't even agree on some basic principles from which to proceed, then there is little or no hope for any sort of constructive debate. Which is precisely what His Holiness found on OWC, despite his best efforts.

And I would finish by adding that normally I would be sympathetic to someone who carries on, even in the face of such high odds; however, in this case it was difficult, since he consistently avoided the key issues, no matter how carefully or moderately put to him, preferring instead to deflect or deny, by concentrating instead on minor, peripheral matters, often involving personal slights, which might otherwise have been ignored, since they didn't add anything to the debate.

P.S. And before anyone else jumps in, I freely (though regretfully) admit that NI soccer has its own "elephant in the room", namely sectarianism and politics. But I genuinely believe that this is recognised at all levels of the game and genuine efforts are being made to shift it, even if we have only so far succeeded in shifting it out into the hall.

[Jim_Murphy_74]

And that elephant, whose very existence so many GAA figures, from Nicky Brennan downwards, seem to deny, is that the GAA has signally failed to attract any significant participation, support or even interest, from a whole community of 1 million Irish people (i.e. Unionists in NI).

EG,

A reasoned post and one I couldn't find much issue with, bar the above sentence.  I'll let it to HHNB to acknowledge/deny the existance of this elephant for himself but I will jump in on behalf of our illustrious Uachtarán though.  Nickey has definitively accepted this very problem and is trying to tackle it.  Admittedly his efforts may appear ham-fisted to unionists in NI : article in COI magazine about "Protestant" (sic) teams, invites to Poots, Paisley and also GAA's participation in stadium project.

Also needing admission is the fact that all this actions have been analyzed on OWC and each analysis led to a conclusion that a less than altruistic motive was at play on his part.  However knowing the man, I assure you the above actions are actually aimed at the very population you talk of.

So while one may not view his efforts as well-directed one should acknowledge his intent.

/Jim.

[his holiness nb]

In response to other posters speculating on this thread that you had been "banned" from OWC, you declined to make the simple factual statement that you had not been banned, or even suspended, merely warned for personal abuse. Instead, you made the following reply:

"Indeed, I wont be going back, to much shite being thrown at me for daring to defend the GAA.

I said an "adios" to the reasoned debaters on there, and a "go f**k yourselves" to the blindly bigoted ones.
Quite satisfying actually" 

EG, the suggestion that I was banned was replied to 3 MINUTES LATER by Sammy to confirm this was not true.
I replied with the above, at the same time as quoting Sammys confirmation of this. What more do you want?? 

As for the rest of your post, I have given my reasons for quitting the board. If you want to keep pestering me over what your opinion is of my conduct on ANOTHER website then work away, I wont be joining in.

Code Select Expand

Also, regarding the "elephant in the room", by avoiding questions or failing to recognise these Elephants I think you will find I never once denied their existance.

What I did do however was do my best to stop disussion about particular topics get dragged into an open forum in which I was fielding questions from anyone with any gripe on the GAA.
I think this is perfectly resonable. By defending the GAA on one particular issue, I was bombarded with all sorts, which I didnt get dragged into, as is my right.

If I were to entertain all these issues put to me, I wouldnt have time for the gaaboard, which is my website of choice.

Now lets move on from why his holiness left the OWC board and back to the paddywagon attack.

[his holiness nb]

The original comment, from HHNB, implied (heavily) that posters on OWC, supported the attacks.

An absolute lie, which I have clarifed several times to you Sammy.

When I asked for clarification, HHNB then quoted the thread, where no-one supporterd the attacks, which was what I'd said in the first place and totally contradicted his post. Rather than try and explain/defend his position HHNB then threw his toys out, at which point I gave up and made a sarky post about eating babies, as I felt that made as much sense as the rest of the discussion.

I have clarified several times that I did not suggest anyone on OWC either supported the attack, OR made a bigoted post.

You know this, it has been clarified several times since.

There have been no toys thrown anywhere, every time I was asked for clarfication on any part of my post, I gave it.

You somehow deliberately dont want to accept this. Thats your problem.

I would ask anyone to read my initial post and point out where I suggested support for the attacks, or said any posts were bigoted.

[his holiness nb]

Incidentally, I'd appreciate if we could get back on topic rather than turn this into a personal crusade against myself.

I guess it must be frustrating that I wont be on OWC anymore to confront, please dont bring this over here.


The paddywagon incidents. Anyone think this was anything other than sectarian?
I hope it was.

[Solomon Kane]

The paddywagon incidents. Anyone think this was anything other than sectarian?
I hope it was.

That could never be ruled out. There are plenty of bad ballixs about who will wreck anything, no matter what. Sectarianism is just too handy a label sometimes for what is just anti-social behaviour. 

[Gaoth Dobhair Abu]

The paddywagon incidents. Anyone think this was anything other than sectarian?
I hope it was.

That could never be ruled out. There are plenty of bad ballixs about who will wreck anything, no matter what. Sectarianism is just too handy a label sometimes for what is just anti-social behaviour. 

I think that the fact that the same bus company (with it's distinctive livery) has been attacked FOUR times in the last year or so puts these attacks beyond anti-social and into the realms of sectarian behaviour - where they occured has to be taken into account when discussing weither or not these attacks are sectarian.

[SammyG]

The paddywagon incidents. Anyone think this was anything other than sectarian?
I hope it was.

That could never be ruled out. There are plenty of bad ballixs about who will wreck anything, no matter what. Sectarianism is just too handy a label sometimes for what is just anti-social behaviour. 

I think that the fact that the same bus company (with it's distinctive livery) has been attacked FOUR times in the last year or so puts these attacks beyond anti-social and into the realms of sectarian behaviour - where they occured has to be taken into account when discussing weither or not these attacks are sectarian.

I would think anti-Republicanism (rather than sectarianism) is likely but certainly not definite, it could just as easily be pissed up students, given the area.

[AZOffaly]

The paddywagon incidents. Anyone think this was anything other than sectarian?
I hope it was.

That could never be ruled out. There are plenty of bad ballixs about who will wreck anything, no matter what. Sectarianism is just too handy a label sometimes for what is just anti-social behaviour. 

I think that the fact that the same bus company (with it's distinctive livery) has been attacked FOUR times in the last year or so puts these attacks beyond anti-social and into the realms of sectarian behaviour - where they occured has to be taken into account when discussing weither or not these attacks are sectarian.

I would think anti-Republicanism (rather than sectarianism) is likely but certainly not definite, it could just as easily be pissed up students, given the area.

anti-Republicanism, with a capital 'R'? Is it likely that they associate the Paddy Wagons with 'Republicanism'?

[SammyG]

The paddywagon incidents. Anyone think this was anything other than sectarian?
I hope it was.

That could never be ruled out. There are plenty of bad ballixs about who will wreck anything, no matter what. Sectarianism is just too handy a label sometimes for what is just anti-social behaviour. 

I think that the fact that the same bus company (with it's distinctive livery) has been attacked FOUR times in the last year or so puts these attacks beyond anti-social and into the realms of sectarian behaviour - where they occured has to be taken into account when discussing weither or not these attacks are sectarian.

I would think anti-Republicanism (rather than sectarianism) is likely but certainly not definite, it could just as easily be pissed up students, given the area.

anti-Republicanism, with a capital 'R'? Is it likely that they associate the Paddy Wagons with 'Republicanism'?

Given the fact that the bus is bedecked in tricolours and the tour guide spiel is 'one-sided' (to say the least), I doubt it would take much for the neanderthals to link them to Republicans.

[Gaoth Dobhair Abu]

Don't know too many pissed students that carry round a cannister of petrol with them on a night out?!

[full back]

Given the fact that the bus is bedecked in tricolours and the tour guide spiel is 'one-sided' (to say the least), I doubt it would take much for the neanderthals to link them to Republicans.

More likely whoever is responsible linked it to catholics

[the green man]

Given the fact that the bus is bedecked in tricolours and the tour guide spiel is 'one-sided' (to say the least), I doubt it would take much for the neanderthals to link them to Republicans.

Hardly 'bedecked' with tricolours.

http://www.fouldsy.com/gallery/albums/paddywagontours2006/northern/DSCF0597.jpg

[ziggysego]

It's a Kerry bus...

[SammyG]

Given the fact that the bus is bedecked in tricolours and the tour guide spiel is 'one-sided' (to say the least), I doubt it would take much for the neanderthals to link them to Republicans.

Hardly 'bedecked' with tricolours.

http://www.fouldsy.com/gallery/albums/paddywagontours2006/northern/DSCF0597.jpg

One on the front, one on the back and one on each door, how many more would you like?