Cork Players to strike - right or wrong poll

buck65

As it says above.

rccaulfield

Player powers A JOKE!!

homerjay2005

bunch of moaners down there in cork. they are an embarrassment to themselves and the GAA in my opinion.

eroo

I hope the Cork fans speak up to these whingers. Player power?? FFS! Those who strike, should be axed imo.

Daysha

I don't think the results of the poll will be in any doubt tbh

kevmy

Supported them in the first strike, sort of supported them last year but that should have settled it.

No time for them now either the players or the board.

Mark Landers called for both Donal Og and Frank Murphy to go on Newstalk last night and to start again with a clean slate while agreeing to past settlements.

If the they had any cop on between the lot of them thats what they would do

homerjay2005

a lad at home once described donal og as -

"that c*nt would go on strike if he didnt have double velvet toilet paper in the dressing room jacks"

never a truer word.

buck65

And rightly so
so smooth

2Scoops

People are saying it's another strike, but essentially it's the same one - it wasn't resolved properly last time. I'm going to tentatively side with the players here - I know a few of them and they are not doing this for fun. They just want the best manager available to them, and it isn't McCarthy.

Anyone who's played under a spoofer knows what they're going through.

Imposter

Did the players not agree not to strike again when the last one was resolved?

hawker

Perhaps if people knew the situation with the stance the CCB took on appointing their 'new' manager, they wouldn't be so quick to take their side.

This is another sad attempt by Frank Murphy to regain the stronghold he has lost over the last few years. I've heard one particular story about that man and it gives you an insight into what he is really like.

I'm behind the players 100% and always will be with that man in charge of Cork GAA.

dahayeser

I am with hawker on this. The granting of a second 2 year term to Gerald was just a blatent 2 fingers to the players, to show them who was still the boss.

Frank is a very calculating individual. He knew that public opinion was with the players when they first went on strike, the players had lost a lot of that support with last years strike. His plan was to back them into a corner knowing that their options were.

Go along with the stunt of extending Gerald's term which would mean all thet they had fought for counted for nothing.

or

Fight back but without public support.

Wheather they were right or wrong once thp public heard that the cork hurlers were striking / retiring again they were going to be against them and brand them a shower of whingers without looking into it fully.

I can't see any other reason why the county board would extend Gerald's contract. He hasn't brought the best out in the players, tactics seem poor, the dogs on the street know the team picked against Tipp (forwards in particular) wouldn't work and now he has lost the confidence of the dressing room. When that happens there is no going back and you certianally aren't going to win anything.

The only reason I can see for reappointing the man was to reassert their authority and break player power.

The primary goal of the players as far as I can see is to have everything in place that gives them every chance of winning an all ireland. Surely that should be the common goal.

ArmaniJeanss

Assuming the players are going on strike because they don't think the manager is any good (as opposed to personality issues) then I'd be 100% behind them.
Obviously I played at a far far lower level, but seen too many teams I played for held back by stupid management and outdated coaching, so good to see players making a stand.

aidanco

I am so sick of Cork's moaning I'm sure Douglas Hyde is turning in his grave. I feel sorry for the young players they have no chance they all need a good kick up the ar%$...idiots. :mad:

Waylander

2Scoops wrote: »

People are saying it's another strike, but essentially it's the same one - it wasn't resolved properly last time. I'm going to tentatively side with the players here - I know a few of them and they are not doing this for fun. They just want the best manager available to them, and it isn't McCarthy.

Anyone who's played under a spoofer knows what they're going through.

Well then they should have cleared these issues last year, and they should not have undertaken NOT to strike again. The players have brought this on themselves and I have no sympathy for them. Its becoming an annual circus down there now.

DDC1990

Wow Deja Vu... did this not happen last year?

Rich1691

Cork aren't goin to get anywhere with this strike. I can't believe Mark Landers Said that Donal og Cusack should retire, He's playin at the top of his game. Ben O'Conner Should know better than to strike. As captain he should be encouraging the players to go back to trainging. No matter who the manager is O'Conner would surely want ot win another all-Ireland or Munster Championship.

Hitman Actual

Long statement from Gerald McCarthy. I'd be very interested in seeing a statement put out by the CCB, but they just seem to be sitting back watching the carnage unfold.

Hitman Actual

Rich1691 wrote: »

Cork aren't goin to get anywhere with this strike. I can't believe Mark Landers Said that Donal og Cusack should retire, He's playin at the top of his game. Ben O'Conner Should know better than to strike. As captain he should be encouraging the players to go back to trainging. No matter who the manager is O'Conner would surely want ot win another all-Ireland or Munster Championship.

Does the fact that someone as genuine as Ben O'Connor is getting involved in this not suggest that the players might actually have a genuine grievance? He doesn't come across as a 'trouble-maker', as many believe Donal Og is.

Rich1691

lenny_leonard wrote: »

Does the fact that someone as genuine as Ben O'Connor is getting involved in this not suggest that the players might actually have a genuine grievance? He doesn't come across as a 'trouble-maker', as many believe Donal Og is.

I guess you have a point there in regards to Ben o'Conners actions, we'll just have to wait and see what happens.

premierstone

Have to laugh at people who are trying to blame Frank Murphy in this, a man who btw has done more for Cork GAA than any of these players, when the simple fact is that the clubs voted in favour of Gerald McCarthy's re-appointment with over 90% in favour, does that not tell anyone exactly what these bunch of prima donnas have created when there own clubs wont even back them?

Waylander

Tbh, Frank Murphy is not totally innocent in this and I really do think he should do the honourable thing and bugger off but I cant see that happen. But for me the players made an agreement last year, and have to honour it now. This has been my issue with the players all along.

premierstone

Waylander wrote: »

Tbh, Frank Murphy is not totally innocent in this and I really do think he should do the honourable thing and bu*ger off but I cant see that happen. But for me the players made an agreement last year, and have to honour it now. This has been my issue with the players all along.

I agree that Murphy is willing to use any tactics nessecary to get what he wants but I genuinely think that he has the best interests of Cork Gaa in mind, which is something I cant say about the players, as people have pointed out quite a few of them are around a good while now and would have been considering retirement anyway, but have these guys stopped to consider the impact their actions may have on the younger members of the panel who will feel obliged to row in with this ''strike''

hawker

Are you seriously trying to say that Donal Og, Sean Og, Ben O'Connor or Diarmuid O'Sullivan have not got the best interests of Cork GAA in mind? Why would they bother their asses to get all bothered about this situation when they are nearing the end of their careers? Imo they are looking after the future of Cork hurling.

The players and the CCB made an agreement last year to go through a certian process when appointing a manager. This process included contacting 5/6 names to see if they were interested in the post and then interviewing them. Despite the protestations of the players at the selection committee meetings only one name came from those meeting - that of Gerald McCarthy.

Of course the clubs agreed to Gerlad McCarthys appointment as heis was the only name put forward

How how anyone can say that the players broke any agreement is beyond me.

premierstone

hawker wrote: »

Are you seriously trying to say that Donal Og, Sean Og, Ben O'Connor or Diarmuid O'Sullivan have not got the best interests of Cork GAA in mind? Why would they bother their asses to get all bothered about this situation when they are nearing the end of their careers? Imo they are looking after the future of Cork hurling.

The players and the CCB made an agreement last year to go through a certian process when appointing a manager. This process included contacting 5/6 names to see if they were interested in the post and then interviewing them. Despite the protestations of the players at the selection committee meetings only one name came from those meeting - that of Gerald McCarthy.

Of course the clubs agreed to Gerlad McCarthys appointment as heis was the only name put forward

How how anyone can say that the players broke any agreement is beyond me.

Donal Og and John Gardiner were quite entitled to put names forward for consideration as part of the committee but the chose not to.

And if anyone saying that the players broke any agreement is beyond you I recomend that you purchase a dictionary for yourself and look up the word ''strike''

patmac

I don't care who is to blame it's getting very boring at this stage, the league was badly disrupted last year. It droned on and on for months on end and when all was said and done the real loser was Cork GAA. Now it starts again and Cork and also in some way the GAA are a laughing stock.
Grow up, meet in private, sort it out, and get on with and stop hogging the headlines for all the wrong reasons, I really couldn't deal with another 6 months of this shiite. Shame on all involved.

Nalced_irl

I say stop your bitching...should be an honour to play for your county so get over it and wear the jersey with pride!

hawker

And perhaps you might consider buying yourself a thesaurus because the words 'strike' and 'retire' have totally different meanings.:p

kerry4sam

If the players get their way on choosing the manager then what will be next?

I stand by the Cork County Board on this matter - the rules and regulations are there for a reason and imo should be adhered to in Cork as they are in every other county.

premierstone

hawker wrote: »

And perhaps you might consider buying yourself a thesaurus because the words 'strike' and 'retire' have totally different meanings.:p

30 players with an average age of 25 threatening to retire unless they get their way isnt a strike??

evil-monkey

I'm sitting this one out. we already thrashed it out here; http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055402768 and came to the conclusion that the players are nothing but a bunch of **doing the mod's job for them**

yahoo_moe

As far as I'm concerned, the players settled last year's strike on the agreement that they'd have two players' representatives involved in the managerial selection process.

Whether they used those positions wrongly, or whether it turned out that those positions weren't as powerful as they were led to believe, it doesn't matter - they made an agreement and they shouldn't be threatening any more strike action.

buck65

Ok boards has voted - back to work Cork and Donal Og just regular toilet tissue for you!:pac:

soundsgood

oh no, i don't like my boss i'm going through all my toys out of the pram, till i get a new boss. I'm not playing anymore.
This is a joke the whole team should be sacked and get people in who are proud to play for there county. reminds me of another cork walkout. Shouldn't have conceded to there demands last time. Do you think if Cristiano Ronaldo and Ryan Giggs decided they didn't like fergie they could get him sacked. Make an example get some proud players, dump these egomaniac nuts

gally74

the media should stop paying this any attention,

typical 2008 ireland that some people think their better than everone

pick 15 decent hurles that want to play for Cork, and leave them have their winge

Dermo123

It beggars belief that so many of Joe Public believes the spin that CCB is putting out in the media. This is not purely about Players not wanting a manager, there has been a tit for tat power struggle going on in Cork GAA for a good many years. It would be best to leave them at it behind closed doors as trying to win favour with the general public is distorting the arguments and prolonging getting to a resolution.
In my opinion a clearout at all levels from CCB and players might be the only solution as any agreements in the past have only been bandaids. Its got too personal now with all the individuals involved.

brettmirl

They are covering this on Prime Time on RTE1 now.

Waylander

Dermo123 wrote: »

It beggars belief that so many of Joe Public believes the spin that CCB is putting out in the media. This is not purely about Players not wanting a manager, there has been a tit for tat power struggle going on in Cork GAA for a good many years. It would be best to leave them at it behind closed doors as trying to win favour with the general public is distorting the arguments and prolonging getting to a resolution.
In my opinion a clearout at all levels from CCB and players might be the only solution as any agreements in the past have only been bandaids. Its got too personal now with all the individuals involved.

Its not that Joe Public is buying into the CCB spin, its that Joe Public is sick of the Cork hurlers throwing their toys out of the pram. This is the third time in 5 years that they have resorted to either threatening strike action or actual strike action. They signed up to an agreement last time around, and now they are not honouring it. Even if they got out manouvered in the last negotiations, that is their problem.

Also it cant go on behind closed doors as it will effect the league and possibly the championship, and both sides are publicity whores who are not capable of privately sorting this out.

hawker

Waylander wrote: »

Its not that Joe Public is buying into the CCB spin, its that Joe Public is sick of the Cork hurlers throwing their toys out of the pram. This is the third time in 5 years that they have resorted to either threatening strike action or actual strike action. They signed up to an agreement last time around, and now they are not honouring it. Even if they got out manouvered in the last negotiations, that is their problem.

Also it cant go on behind closed doors as it will effect the league and possibly the championship, and both sides are publicity whores who are not capable of privately sorting this out.

Do you honestly think Cork hurlers are redrawing their services for no particular reason? How are the Cork hurlers not honouring the agreement set out last February? Do you believe the CCB honoured that agreement?

Again, it's all propaganda.

Mr. Incognito

http://www.irishexaminer.com/irishexaminer/pages/story.aspx-qqqg=sport-qqqm=sport-qqqa=sport-qqqid=76729-qqqx=1.asp

Cork players: ‘Vendetta’ against us

By Michael Moynihan
THE Cork senior hurlers last night issued a hard hitting statement challenging comments made by manager Gerald McCarthy and the County Board as the dispute between players and officials showed no signs of resolution.


The squad claimed in a statement exclusively released to the Irish Examiner last night, that the campaign against them in the row over McCarthy’s re-appointment “can only be interpreted as constituting a vendetta”.

They again insisted they do not want the right to pick the manager and, in the course of a lengthy statement, the players also claimed a Board member on the seven-man selection committee stated McCarthy was the “second-best man for the job”.

The players statement added: “At no point in the proceedings was the board’s first choice as manager confirmed, which shows that, in our view, this was in fact a ‘done deal’.”

“We recognise the upset and annoyance which these situations have caused Cork GAA people over recent years,” said a player representative. “But we’re concerned by what we see as attempts to mislead the Cork GAA public, which is why we feel obliged to make the following points by way of clarification.

We feel there has been a concerted campaign against us and we have no choice but to try to set the record straight. For all of us these developments are unwelcome and unnecessary, but for some of us, due to the magnitude of the campaign, they can only be interpreted as constituting a vendetta.”

Gerald McCarthy questioned whether players had the right to pick the manager, saying on Newstalk: “If that’s the way, it’s player power pure and total.”

PLAYERS: “The players don’t say they have the right to pick the manager, (their wish was to be involved in the selection process) nor do they want the right to pick the manager. The players have the right, according to binding arbitration, to have a two-sevenths representation in the process to appoint a new manager. The players didn’t decide this, it was decided by Kieran Mulvey in binding arbitration.”

In his statement of October 30, issued to the media, Gerald McCarthy said the “presentation by certain players of my appointment as Cork hurling manager has been quite disingenuous... I’m happy that my appointment was correctly made — it was not a ‘done deal’, as has been suggested.”

PLAYERS: “Gerald wasn’t present at any of the five meetings and is not in a position to say whether the players are telling the truth or not. For the record, the players agree there were five meetings but maintain that there was no process, and that they have told no lies.”

The county board statement of October 31 reaffirmed its support for its “properly appointed hurling manager”.

PLAYERS: “Not for the first time, the Cork County Board deems it necessary to say that what they have done in the past was correctly done. The players don’t accept that this was a legitimate process or a legitimate appointment and as a result, don’t accept that there are any constraints on them or on any of their actions.”

The county board insists the two player representatives never presented any other candidate for consideration . . . at the third meeting there was a discussion of the names of other possible managers.”

PLAYERS: “In two sentences, the innate contradiction of the county board statement is clearly set out. It can hardly be said that nobody was presented for consideration if there was a discussion of their names. By way of further clarification, the names were suggested at the second meeting (not the third), which was attended by Seán Óg Ó hAilpín (as proxy for John Gardiner). It was the only meeting he attended and he suggested potential candidates. Regarding the process, the players believe that the board tried to force them into a vote (on one man) where they held the majority, while attempting to maintain that this was ‘a process’.

“The reason there were five meetings was because, from meeting number two, the players tried to resist the situation being imposed on them, which clearly was not as envisaged by Mr Mulvey’s findings nor in the best interests of Cork hurling. When other candidates were mentioned by players, they were not considered but a board member in the course of the discussions stated that he believed Gerald was the second-best man for the job. At no point in the proceedings was the board’s first choice as manager confirmed, which shows that, in our view, this was in fact a ‘done deal’.”

Gerald has referred to “the ferocity” of the approach of players in his media statement.

PLAYERS: “We’re amazed Gerald could have found any approach to him ferocious, intimidating or in any way improper. Even though he was not the Cork hurling manager at the time, given the widely reported ‘lack of respect’ to other sitting intercounty managers in other counties, and out of respect for Gerald personally, it was felt that a direct approach on a human level was vital. At that time the players — as they do now — felt Gerald was being put in a position by the board and wanted him to avoid that, especially when he did not enjoy the confidence of any panel member from a managerial point of view. This was leaving aside the panel’s objections to his appointment.

“The players went to see Gerald on the morning of his appointment in an effort to show the unity of the panel and the respect of the panel to him. All 30 panel members wanted to go but only 10 were available due to work commitments on the day.”

Gerald McCarthy’s comments to the media.

PLAYERS: “Since his purported appointment, Gerald McCarthy has launched a campaign seeking to justify his position, which the players would have regarded as being misguided until, in their view, the line was crossed on a number of occasions by Gerald. He has accused the players of bullying him — that did not happen at any time. He has been treated at all times with great respect, as befits his position.”

On Newstalk Gerald referred to Ben’s interview in the Irish Examiner, specifically the matter of phone calls to younger players from management — “some players were contacted, and there were younger players contacted ... he did not put any pressure on any younger players. But he did point out to players that, look, there’s a lot at stake here for younger players”.

PLAYERS: “No senior players were contacted, and the younger players contacted certainly felt they were being pressurised. To quote from one of the calls, the management representative said: ‘It’s the younger players will lose out’. This was interpreted as a threat or pressure by the younger players concerned. To seek to label Ben O’Connor as uttering untruths is outrageous and unacceptable to us. In many parts of the GAA world, Ben O’Connor is considered to be a hurling legend.”

Gerald said on Newstalk that Ben O’Connor’s suggestion the player vote was unanimous was inaccurate.

PLAYERS: “Gerald was not present at any meeting. The panel was absolutely unanimous in its rejection of Gerald as proposed manager, but at the time, in a confidential meeting, a small number of players held a minority view as to how best to proceed in the current climate. This has since been unanimously resolved.”

Gerald’s statement to the media says “I have tried to understand how the players have painted themselves into a corner.”

PLAYERS: “THE players had issued no statement at that time — an interview had been given by one player, Ben O’Connor, in the face of blanket media coverage of Gerald’s point of view and the comments of other parties. The players had made no statements and hadn’t painted themselves into any corners. It should be remembered who brought these matters into the public domain.”

Gerald’s media statement added: “I have regrettably come to the conclusion that there is a predisposition to conflict among a very small number of Cork players.”

PLAYERS: “This echoes the numerous attempts by the board, over the years, to maintain that somewhere between 25 and 28 Cork senior hurlers are being said and led by two to five others – which the 25 to 28 players, whoever they might be, find deeply insulting. It also shows the opinion of the board and Gerald as to the backbone of the Cork senior hurling team. To say that teachers, engineers, bank managers, farmers, businessmen and parents could be led down roads they did not wish to take by one or two of their team-mates is ridiculous.

“Such moral weakness may prevail in other bodies, particularly those which can vote almost unanimously, in diametrically opposing ways, with just four days between each vote, like the Cork County Board.”

Gerald’s statement also reads: “For some players to attempt to retrofit an objection ... to treat people in a summary and offensive way reflects poorly on them.”

PLAYERS: “Yet again, this is an echo of the board’s view, as there is no question of ‘some players’. All representations made at any time were made on the unanimous instructions of the entire panel. There was no ‘retrofit’ – rather, over five meetings, there was an objection by the players, through their representatives, to the efforts to back them into a corner. These objections took place over the course of the meetings and before the vote was taken, not after it.”

The publication of Cathal O’Reilly’s document.

PLAYERS: “We are at a complete loss as to how a confidential document, to which we all contributed under conditions of strict privacy, could find its way to the pages of a newspaper.

“Cathal O’Reilly has confirmed that only one copy of this document was ever produced by him and was only given to one individual – Gerald McCarthy. For this document to be given to anyone, let alone a newspaper, exemplifies the lack of understanding on Gerald’s part, in our view, of the nature of a relationship of trust.

“Cathal O’Reilly was brought in to help the players and Gerald when it was recognised by all and sundry that there was a lack of trust as part of a dysfunctional relationship between management and panel.

“Cathal has confirmed to the panel that on October 29, without any contact from the Cork management, he received a phone call from Gerald thanking him for his help, asking him to return next year and failing to mention anything about the use of, publication of, loss of, misplacement of the confidential document given to him many months before and which miraculously appeared the following day in the newspaper.”

The county board statement says it “. . . may have been guilty of misjudgements in the past, but few can deny that we have made adjustments to take account of changed times, new values and circumstances.”

PLAYERS: “To say the board ‘may have been guilty of misjudgements in the past’ is a crass understatement. Gerald McCarthy was ‘elected’ as the sole candidate put forward by the board, following the county board secretary being, in Gerald’s words, ‘very persuasive’ in 2006.

“The players, despite their misgivings and the stated intent of members of the previous management to apply for the job, did not raise an objection to Gerald’s appointment. This followed four years under Donal O’Grady and John Allen, both with different management methods, without a single issue or incident arising between team, management or the county board.

“Twelve months ago the hurlers and footballers begged with the Cork County Board not to make an appointment of a football manager because of a flawed appointment process. The players did not want the issue personalised at that time.

“Twelve months on its own senior hurling team begged the board not to make an appointment because of a flawed appointment process and its obvious outcome, and begged the individual concerned not to put himself in the same position.

“Despite the binding arbitration findings, we think it is clear exactly what type of adjustments the board has made.”

Gerald says in his statement this issue is about ‘due process, respect and other core values that I and many others hold dear’.

PLAYERS: “We wholeheartedly agree.”

Well. when I read this bit

The players don’t say they have the right to pick the manager, (their wish was to be involved in the selection process) nor do they want the right to pick the manager. The players have the right, according to binding arbitration, to have a two-sevenths representation in the process to appoint a new manager

I'm kinda lost. They were on the 7 man committee to pick the manager. They didn't want Gerald, they abstained from voting, and now they are throwing the rattle out of the pram. The players don't want to pick the manager? Fine, they just want the right to decide what manager to NOT pick? And why would the county board want to foist a manger on players that don't want him is beyond me. They won't play for him. Madness.

hawker

The process allowed for other names to be discussed and possibly interviewed with a view to filling the job. Gerald McCarthys was the only name to come from this selection process despite the fact of 5/6 other names being mentioned as a possible manager.

The Merlin Murphy works in mysterious ways.

premierstone

hawker wrote: »

The process allowed for other names to be discussed and possibly interviewed with a view to filling the job. Gerald McCarthys was the only name to come from this selection process despite the fact of 5/6 other names being mentioned as a possible manager.

The Merlin Murphy works in mysterious ways.

There were two players involved in the process they attended five meetings in total and at no time did they put forward an alternative to McCarthy which they had the right to do, and then they dont vote against his appointment but instead they sulk and obstain :rolleyes:

blackbelt

I say if it goes on to the point where they concede a walkover to ONE team in the league that they should be relegated and thrown into Division 2.

Player power.....ridiculous.They are living up to their name...."rebels".Cork GAA is a joke despite the fact that they got to a semi-final in football and hurling.They have disrupted the whole system with their dribble and these same bunch of players got behind the footballers by striking.

I think they should be left to suffer and not be accomodated.Then they'll learn what power they have.

hawker

premierstone wrote: »

There were two players involved in the process they attended five meetings in total and at no time did they put forward an alternative to McCarthy which they had the right to do, and then they dont vote against his appointment but instead they sulk and obstain :rolleyes:

No you are actually wrong. There were 4/5 other names mentioned by other memebers of that committee.

hawker

blackbelt wrote: »

I say if it goes on to the point where they concede a walkover to ONE team in the league that they should be relegated and thrown into Division 2.

Player power.....ridiculous.They are living up to their name...."rebels".Cork GAA is a joke despite the fact that they got to a semi-final in football and hurling.They have disrupted the whole system with their dribble and these same bunch of players got behind the footballers by striking.

I think they should be left to suffer and not be accomodated.Then they'll learn what power they have.

As far as I can recall player power existed in Dublin not too long ago. I recall reading in Dessie Farrells autobiography regarding a manager and how players either got rid of one or ensured a certain manager was brought on board. Am I right or wrong?

cruiserweight

blackbelt wrote: »

I say if it goes on to the point where they concede a walkover to ONE team in the league that they should be relegated and thrown into Division 2.

AFAIK under GAA rules if you give 2 walkovers in a competition you are kicked out of that competition. They weren't this year so if it continues why would it be any different this year.

prendy

the GAA should make it clear to the cork county board that if they dont field a team they will be thrown out for the year, both league and championship. last years situation was unacceptable as some teams didnt have to play them.

This will force the county board to ensure that either
a) they resolve the dispute
b) they field a team of players who will play for their county and be proud to do so whatever the manager.

if they choose B it would be the kick in the balls that the existing players deserve.

blackbelt

cruiserweight wrote: »

AFAIK under GAA rules if you give 2 walkovers in a competition you are kicked out of that competition. They weren't this year so if it continues why would it be any different this year.

That is true but Cork somehow were let off by the GAA and CCC as a result of intervention from the DRA.They then agreed that strike action wouldn't be an option if further disputes were to occur and now they are threatening to go back on this agreement 9 months later.

It is riiculous.Let them off once shame on Cork,let them off twice shame on the GAA.This strike action should not be tolerated at all.It is not as if they are a junior club team who have trouble fielding 15.This is a county that is being affected by what seems to be a few players stirring the pot as a result of the manager.

blackbelt

hawker wrote: »

As far as I can recall player power existed in Dublin not too long ago. I recall reading in Dessie Farrells autobiography regarding a manager and how players either got rid of one or ensured a certain manager was brought on board. Am I right or wrong?

That is correct to a certain degree.A few of the Dublin players went to that meeting in Parnell Park when Tommy Carr's term as manager was in question.Farrell and others were behind him but the DCB and club delegates were against Carr staying on.

There was never truly any player power on the Dubs team but they had a certain influence which was small enough.Ultimately,the decisions always laid with the club delegates and DCB officials.There was never any threat of strike in regard to the decisions that were made.

Waylander

hawker wrote: »

Do you honestly think Cork hurlers are redrawing their services for no particular reason? How are the Cork hurlers not honouring the agreement set out last February? Do you believe the CCB honoured that agreement?

Again, it's all propaganda.

They had the involvement in the process the wanted, and they never mentioned another possibility. They undertook not to strike again, and now it looks like they are going to strike. So that is how they are not honouring the agreement.

I did not say that they were doing it for no particular reason but they are showing a tendency to do it everytime they dont get their own way. That is what makes it different from the Dubs. I supported the Cork hurlers the first couple of times around, now I am just sick of their whining!

Hitman Actual

blackbelt wrote: »

It is riiculous.Let them off once shame on Cork,let them off twice shame on the GAA.This strike action should not be tolerated at all.It is not as if they are a junior club team who have trouble fielding 15.This is a county that is being affected by what seems to be a few players stirring the pot as a result of the manager.

The players are adamant that the views of the players reps are the unanimous views of the players: (link)

Irish Examiner wrote:

Gerald’s media statement added: “I have regrettably come to the conclusion that there is a predisposition to conflict among a very small number of Cork players.”

PLAYERS: “This echoes the numerous attempts by the board, over the years, to maintain that somewhere between 25 and 28 Cork senior hurlers are being said and led by two to five others – which the 25 to 28 players, whoever they might be, find deeply insulting. It also shows the opinion of the board and Gerald as to the backbone of the Cork senior hurling team. To say that teachers, engineers, bank managers, farmers, businessmen and parents could be led down roads they did not wish to take by one or two of their team-mates is ridiculous.

So if that's to be believed, then by appointing Gerald McCarthy the CCB are either (a) complete idiots, or (b) spoiling for a fight. The cynic in me suggests the latter.