Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

An open letter to Pat Fitzsimons

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    pawntof4
    Registered Users Posts: 116 ✭✭pawntof4


    NubieOne wrote: »
    One clear example of what I'm saying is the central issue of the treatment of the MCU delegate, Gerry Graham. In his manifesto, Pat says, and I quote "The recent vote of no confidence in the Munster delegate on the ICU Executive was the culmination of a number of issues that required the removal of the delegate from the executive". Then, in his reply to Alan Salsac, he claims, and again I quote "Gerry left the meeting of his own accord". This is just one of many inconsistencies that the set of documents distributed contain.

    Comedy gold! Put simply you are lacking any understanding of the situation and the quotes you have taken from Pat's literature are typical of the baloney that seems to get spewed across this forum on a daily basis.

    Clarity will be forthcoming soon but for now take my word for it that this ticket that is constantly referred to on here is a sham and a lie. They have secret motives and want to take power so they can spy on us all. Am I the only person who can see this!! [/sarcasm]


  • Options
    #63
    Sparks
    Registered Users Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    pawntof4 wrote: »
    [/sarcasm]

    Huh. That wasn't the tag I was expecting to see there to be honest...


  • Options
    #64
    RoundTower
    Registered Users Posts: 5,083 ✭✭✭RoundTower


    A response to Pat's manifesto from John McMorrow's team


  • Options
    #65
    chesstity
    Registered Users Posts: 19 ✭chesstity


    reunion wrote: »
    The MCU shouldn't have to nominate someone (or invited to nominate someone else) if they weren't removed from office.

    The MCU rep shouldn't have been asked to leave if there was no basis to do so. A vote shouldn't have taken place if it was unconstitutional. This would also mean Gerry did NOT leave on his own accord, being asked to leave AND having a vote for your removal. He did leave without requiring Gardai to be called and without throwing items at the chairperson.


    Mud Slinging ???


  • Options
    #66
    cdeb
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 7,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭cdeb


    An overview of events from the MCU's point of view.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    Tim Harding
    Closed Accounts Posts: 954 ✭✭✭Tim Harding


    As both sides seem to claim that John Cassidy (a person whom I don't know) agrees with them, concerning the Ennis congress issue, don't we need an unambiguous and verifiable statement from him on the matters where he is mentioned before deciding who to believe?


  • Options
    #68
    cdeb
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 7,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭cdeb


    I believe he's attending the AGM for that reason.


  • Options
    #69
    Tim Harding
    Closed Accounts Posts: 954 ✭✭✭Tim Harding


    Good, but how is he going to make himself heard before we vote? I think he needs to bring numerous copies of a signed statement and hand them out as people come in?

    In general, a lot to do with ratifying arbiter norms (or not) seems to need serious reviewing by the new executive as, prima facie, there appear to have been multiple abuses.


  • Options
    #70
    pawntof4
    Registered Users Posts: 116 ✭✭pawntof4


    Tim Harding wrote: »
    Good, but how is he going to make himself heard before we vote?

    Does the agenda for the meeting not have be accepted by the attendees and if it does can an attendee not request that the agenda items be heard in a different order?


  • Options
    #71
    Tim Harding
    Closed Accounts Posts: 954 ✭✭✭Tim Harding


    pawntof4 wrote: »
    Does the agenda for the meeting not have be accepted by the attendees and if it does can an attendee not request that the agenda items be heard in a different order?

    Is that somwhere in standing orders that we can read?
    The chair holds the power so I cannot see that happening if somebody wants to speak to contradict the chair?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Pete Morriss
    Registered Users Posts: 213 ✭✭Pete Morriss


    pawntof4 wrote: »
    Does the agenda for the meeting not have be accepted by the attendees and if it does can an attendee not request that the agenda items be heard in a different order?

    That would be normal good practice. Indeed, last year Pat Fitzsimmons himself challenged the announced Order of Business, and the chairperson [me] allowed that challenge to be put to a vote. One would hope that Pat Fitzsimmons extends the same courtesy to others that was extended to him.


  • Options
    #73
    pawntof4
    Registered Users Posts: 116 ✭✭pawntof4


    Pete Morriss wrote: »
    That would be normal good practice. Indeed, last year Pat Fitzsimmons himself challenged the announced Order of Business, and the chairperson [me] allowed that challenge to be put to a vote. One would hope that Pat Fitzsimmons extends the same courtesy to others that was extended to him.

    Everyone says he's a good guy so I assume he will


  • Options
    #74
    rob51
    Registered Users Posts: 95 ✭✭rob51


    pawntof4 wrote: »
    Everyone says he's a good guy so I assume he will

    You will also see on the MCU website that a motion of no confidence in the current Executive has been submitted. So far Pat is refusing to accept it as it wasn't submitted in time. It was submitted in time to meet the requirements of Article 7.7 of the Constitution on 19th September.


  • Options
    #75
    rob51
    Registered Users Posts: 95 ✭✭rob51


    Tim Harding wrote: »
    As both sides seem to claim that John Cassidy (a person whom I don't know) agrees with them, concerning the Ennis congress issue, don't we need an unambiguous and verifiable statement from him on the matters where he is mentioned before deciding who to believe?

    I think the difference Tim is that we know Gerry said in his email that he would act as arbiter and he did act as arbiter. Established fact.

    On the other hand Pat has accused Gerry of misleading the Executive on the basis that he says John Cassidy said that Gerry said that he would not provide an arbiter and equipment if Gabriel Mirza played. Gabriel played and Gerry acted as arbiter. A pretty tenuous link on which to find Gerry guilty of misleading the Executive in my opinion.

    Also there is absolutely no suggestion that John Cassidy made any complaint to the ICU about this.


Advertisement