Second Captains

Trent Houseboat

I'm shocked that there hasn't been a grand triggering from the usual outrage brigade on here railing against political correctness and right-on south Dublin leftism after Jayo and the lads suggested that racism was bad yesterday.

They're either less petty than I thought or have stopped listening.

Cienciano

The RWC bit was interesting. Especially Ken saying how bad a venue South Africa was. Imagine Canada vs Romania in a 40k seater stadium? Gerry had a good point about security, you can't really get much safer than Ireland

dulpit wrote: »

I assume episode 1,000 will include Dunphy v Ken?

I actually hope it doesn't. Initially I thought it would be good, but Dunphy is pretty much just making stuff up for his argument. Also, the entire thing was about pep wasn't it? Giles said he was a fraud? Wonder if he's changed his mind?

bren2001

Cienciano wrote: »

The RWC bit was interesting. Especially Ken saying how bad a venue South Africa was. Imagine Canada vs Romania in a 40k seater stadium? Gerry had a good point about security, you can't really get much safer than Ireland



I actually hope it doesn't. Initially I thought it would be good, but Dunphy is pretty much just making stuff up for his argument. Also, the entire thing was about pep wasn't it? Giles said he was a fraud? Wonder if he's changed his mind?

Gerry's point was massively flawed. Yes, we are quite safe domestically but we've little to no experience of security during major tournaments. We've demonstrated it during single events such as the Queen, Barack, Europa League Final etc. but never during an international tournament over a prolonged number of weeks.

In our technical document we did not outline our procedures for dealing with such international threats. France and South Africa not only did but have demonstrated how effective their approaches have been. If we had done so, I reckon we would have scored quite well in that category. It was a massive oversight by the committee and hopefully, if we bid again, not a mistake they would make again.

Raoul

I do kind of agree with Ken though, feck paying these organisations so that we can host their events.

Still Ill

Raoul wrote: »

I do kind of agree with Ken though, feck paying these organisations so that we can host their events.

Got a good laugh at that part this morning when I was listening.. Ken on top form there and with his Jose Mourinho sausage analogy

Cienciano

bren2001 wrote: »

Gerry's point was massively flawed. Yes, we are quite safe domestically but we've little to no experience of security during major tournaments. We've demonstrated it during single events such as the Queen, Barack, Europa League Final etc. but never during an international tournament over a prolonged number of weeks.

In our technical document we did not outline our procedures for dealing with such international threats. France and South Africa not only did but have demonstrated how effective their approaches have been. If we had done so, I reckon we would have scored quite well in that category. It was a massive oversight by the committee and hopefully, if we bid again, not a mistake they would make again.

I think Gerry was talking about an important aspect of security which is risk. South Africa and France have significantly higher risk of incidents related to security than Ireland does. OK, we never hosted a tournament, but there's a much higher risk of a terrorist attack in france and a higher risk of fans getting killed in South Africa.

bren2001

Cienciano wrote: »

I think Gerry was talking about an important aspect of security which is risk. South Africa and France have significantly higher risk of incidents related to security than Ireland does. OK, we never hosted a tournament, but there's a much higher risk of a terrorist attack in france and a higher risk of fans getting killed in South Africa.

But France and South Africa have demonstrated they are well capable of dealing with such risk. Both tournaments ran smoothly. I attended Euro 2016 and thought French security did an absolutely excellent job.

The key issue that was not addressed in the Irish report was how we would deal with it. Why is Ireland less likely to experience a terrorist attack over France/SA? In our report we did not highlight what the potential threats were and what we would do to deal with them. France and SA did. Ultimately we didn't highlight what the risk level was and the board could only score us on what we wrote. I can easily see why SA were deemed as safe as us.

I saw and agreed with Gerrys point (to an extent) but to score us better than SA or France based on our report would have been unfair.

Cienciano

bren2001 wrote: »

But France and South Africa have demonstrated they are well capable of dealing with such risk. Both tournaments ran smoothly. I attended Euro 2016 and thought French security did an absolutely excellent job.

The key issue that was not addressed in the Irish report was how we would deal with it. Why is Ireland less likely to experience a terrorist attack over France/SA? In our report we did not highlight what the potential threats were and what we would do to deal with them. France and SA did. Ultimately we didn't highlight what the risk level was and the board could only score us on what we wrote. I can easily see why SA were deemed as safe as us.

I saw and agreed with Gerrys point (to an extent) but to score us better than SA or France based on our report would have been unfair.

The report did say we are less likely to have a terrorist attack than france. I'd rather not have one than have one and be equipped to deal with it. All the security in the world can't stop a terrorist attack outside a stadium, a gun in a crowd or driving a car/van is all it takes, so you would assume lower risk would be the most important factor.
And never mind terrorist attacks, would a fan be safer on a 3 week trip to Ireland or south Africa?
Personally I think overall France is the best candidate for the world cup, but to put Ireland on par with south Africa for fan safety is ridiculous.

Running Balance

For the RWC decision it'll come down to money I imagine..

Think also it's naive to think there couldn't be an incident if Ireland hosted it. To just say "ah sure everyone loves the irish" who'd strike us is silly. (Appreciate I'm being overly flippant as a point)

dastardly00

Raoul wrote: »

I do kind of agree with Ken though, feck paying these organisations so that we can host their events.

But... but... it would be a chance to build a monorail!

Dots1982

PhilipsR wrote: »

Dots1982 wrote: »

Has the world/this forum gone mad!? Why the **** would I give a flying **** about a ****ing 80s goalkeeper’s ****ing journey towards ****ing Twitter self-discovery.

Do you pay the monthly fee for the podcasts? You seem hyper-critical of nearly everything they do.

Yeah, its only a fiver sure. If Denmark Ireland goes against us i could cancel as i see next year being a very bleak one for irish sport without World Cup interest.

It’s unfortunate if i come across as hypercritical. I’d see myself as discussing the shortcomings of the show. I can give a list of the shortcomings as i see them if it would help you to understand my argument. I’ve been listening to the lads for years upon years and ultimately i find them very funny. That’s the main strength of the show.

The mood of this forum is very snipey in terms of been free to discuss the good and the bad of the show. A fair quotient of the posters here try to dismiss and discourage anyone from posting critical opinions of the show. I don’t think they even realize they are doing it but it would be good if they could re think that approach and be more accepting of other’s opinions than their own. In any case i’ll Keep giving my 2 cents.

Pete Moss

Dots1982 wrote:

The mood of this forum is very snipey in terms of been free to discuss the good and the bad of the show. A fair quotient of the posters here try to dismiss and discourage anyone from posting critical opinions of the show. I don’t think they even realize they are doing it but it would be good if they could re think that approach and be more accepting of other’s opinions than their own. In any case i’ll Keep giving my 2 cents.

I don't think the issue is others not respecting the opinions of contributors to this forum, but the remarks made regarding your post probably stemmed from the fact that you framed your opinion in form of the below rant...

Dots1982 wrote:

Has the world/this forum gone mad!? Why the **** would I give a flying **** about a ****ing 80s goalkeeper’s ****ing journey towards ****ing Twitter self-discovery.

Dots1982

Pete Moss wrote: »

Dots1982 wrote:

The mood of this forum is very snipey in terms of been free to discuss the good and the bad of the show. A fair quotient of the posters here try to dismiss and discourage anyone from posting critical opinions of the show. I don’t think they even realize they are doing it but it would be good if they could re think that approach and be more accepting of other’s opinions than their own. In any case i’ll Keep giving my 2 cents.

I don't think the issue is others not respecting the opinions of contributors to this forum, but the remarks made regarding your post probably stemmed from the fact that you framed your opinion in form of the below rant...

Dots1982 wrote:

Has the world/this forum gone mad!? Why the **** would I give a flying **** about a ****ing 80s goalkeeper’s ****ing journey towards ****ing Twitter self-discovery.

I would say critical comment of the show is not warmly received here by a lot of posters. Plenty of examples of this before the rant.

The rant was meant half as a joke BTW. Don’t focus too much on it.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Ciaran_B

They said it would be a memorable show but gave no details about guests or anything.

Baggly

Dots1982 wrote: »

I would say critical comment of the show is not warmly received here by a lot of posters. Plenty of examples of this before the rant.

The rant was meant half as a joke BTW. Don’t focus too much on it.

You would teach the Japanese a thing or two about saving face, Dots.

corwill

Dots1982 wrote: »

Yeah, its only a fiver sure. If Denmark Ireland goes against us i could cancel as i see next year being a very bleak one for irish sport without World Cup interest.

It’s unfortunate if i come across as hypercritical. I’d see myself as discussing the shortcomings of the show. I can give a list of the shortcomings as i see them if it would help you to understand my argument. I’ve been listening to the lads for years upon years and ultimately i find them very funny. That’s the main strength of the show.

The mood of this forum is very snipey in terms of been free to discuss the good and the bad of the show. A fair quotient of the posters here try to dismiss and discourage anyone from posting critical opinions of the show. I don’t think they even realize they are doing it but it would be good if they could re think that approach and be more accepting of other’s opinions than their own. In any case i’ll Keep giving my 2 cents.

Is irony the right word for folks being sensitive about being challenged about their own vituperative criticism?

Dots1982

You see irony, I see a queue of posters coming up to have a pop at someone who had critical views of the pod....much as I predicted.

It’s the mood around here...it’s so ingrained that those that do it don’t even acknowledge to themselves that they can’t handle criticism of the pod.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Raisins

Dots1982 wrote: »

You see irony, I see a queue of posters coming up to have a pop at someone who had critical views of the pod....much as I predicted.

It’s the mood around here...it’s so ingrained that those that do it don’t even acknowledge to themselves that they can’t handle criticism of the pod.

Ireland is small you're not going to get objectivity on boards for this kinda chat you could be getting comments back from their family / friends defending the show.

I like the pod and I subscribe but I've friends you used to listen but have pulled out of it. I don't think the quality is as good as it used to be. It's obvious in some pods that they chat for 5 mins, play a pre recorded interview with someone pushing their book and then finish it up.

lawred2

Dots1982 wrote: »

You see irony, I see a queue of posters coming up to have a pop at someone who had critical views of the pod....much as I predicted.

It’s the mood around here...it’s so ingrained that those that do it don’t even acknowledge to themselves that they can’t handle criticism of the pod.

oh come on - just get over yourself will you

Raoul

Raisins wrote: »

Ireland is small you're not going to get objectivity on boards for this kinda chat you could be getting comments back from their family / friends defending the show.

I like the pod and I subscribe but I've friends you used to listen but have pulled out of it. I don't think the quality is as good as it used to be. It's obvious in some pods that they chat for 5 mins, play a pre recorded interview with someone pushing their book and then finish it up.

Some of what you have said is true but this last week or so has been excellent.

delta_bravo

Just wondering if I subscribe now do you get access to previous pods also? Obviously most will be dated but the politics ones interest me

bren2001

delta_bravo wrote: »

Just wondering if I subscribe now do you get access to previous pods also? Obviously most will be dated but the politics ones interest me

you get access to everything.

Ol' Donie

I decided at the start of the NFL season to pay attention every week, as opposed to dipping in and out over the season and then staying up for the Superbowl in February.

I jumped on the 49ers bandwagon way back in the days of Joe Montana, when I was too young to know what a bandwagon was, but now there's no getting off.

49ers have lost every game this season, but the reason I'm posting about it here is that I've subscribed to the podcast of US Murph's show. Listening to the previews and reviews of every game. Ideal for a guy who a) has a grasp of the rules but not much more than that, and b) loves soccer more than any sport but has grown so, so weary of so much of the b*llocks that goes with the Premier League.

Anyway, love it, recommend it for everyone.

Edit: Combined with The NFL Show on BBC 1, usually on Tues night and either Fri or Sat night. Love that show too.

jaykay74

Nice. Hopefully George has a few decent tales to tell...

It's arrived! Episode 1000, and with it a chat with our favourite commentator, and official national treasure, George Hamilton.

Ol' Donie

Before I listen to today's one...

Who in the name of Jesus Christ almighty is this Liverpool-based imbecile on telling us that football has never been about being entertained?

What the hell is this?

corwill

Ol' Donie wrote: »

Before I listen to today's one...

Who in the name of Jesus Christ almighty is this Liverpool-based imbecile on telling us that football has never been about being entertained?

What the hell is this?

Haven't listened yet, but I don't need to, to tell you that Tony Evans is a bitter, contrary arsehole.

Raisins

Raoul wrote: »

Some of what you have said is true but this last week or so has been excellent.

Look I like the pod I don't want to get sucked into criticising it but I'd find it hard to recommend for €5 per month to a person who had never heard it before. What I mean by that is that the reason I enjoy it is probably because I've listened for years and the lads are funny. The content isn't there for a new listener but I might stand corrected. In the past few weeks no players chair, no good politics show and a lot of filler. It is a slow time of year in fairness.

Ol' Donie

corwill wrote: »

Haven't listened yet, but I don't need to, to tell you that Tony Evans is a bitter, contrary arsehole.

Disappointed in the lads even entertaining that nonsense.