David Corkery speaks about Anthony Foley

Logo

'Why Anthony Foley? Why not a lesser being? Someone without kids'.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/munster-rugby/why-anthony-foley-why-not-a-lesser-being-someone-without-kids-former-team-mate-on-the-mindboggling-tragedy-35136423.html

Maybe we could stone a few singles/gays who might be responsible enough to choose not to have children for personal reasons. Or maybe just abort lesser beings who are unable to procreate.

Holograph

I choose to interpret that as "a lesser being or someone without kids" - the guy, in the throes of grief, asks a few of those rhetorical question but the Indo, being its classy self, just puts those bits in the headline and makes them look joined together.

Satriale

Rag.

Logo

I realise the guy is probably deep in grief but why broadcast to the nation under those circumstances. It doesn't detract from the fact that he thinks childless people are lesser beings and have less to contribute to society.

Tasden

Logo wrote: »

I realise the guy is probably deep in grief but why broadcast to the nation under those circumstances. It doesn't detract from the fact that he thinks childless people are lesser beings and have less to contribute to society.

That is not fact. He doesn't think that. The "lesser beings" and "those without kids" were two separate questions. He also said why not him.

I don't even know why I'm bothering to reply because anybody with an ounce of sympathy would understand exactly what the guy meant and wouldn't try make it into something it's not.

The Backwards Man

Whoever made that headline knew exactly what they were doing anyway. Ireland's Sun.

VinLieger

Logo wrote: »

I realise the guy is probably deep in grief but why broadcast to the nation under those circumstances. It doesn't detract from the fact that he thinks childless people are lesser beings and have less to contribute to society.

Read the quote he never said someone without kids is a lesser being, the Indo just arranged it that way for the headline.

Get over yourself the man is obviously grief stricken as are a lot of other people so stop trying to troll off peoples grief

Phoebas

Holograph wrote: »

I choose to interpret that as "a lesser being or someone without kids" - the guy, in the throes of grief, asks a few of those rhetorical question but the Indo, being its classy self, just puts those bits in the headline and makes them look joined together.

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Whoever made that headline knew exactly what they were doing anyway. Ireland's Sun.

Did either of you listen to the Sean O'Rourke interview?

The Indo headline accurately reflected what was said.

Phoebas

VinLieger wrote: »

Read the quote he never said someone without kids is a lesser being, the Indo just arranged it that way for the headline.

Get over yourself the man is obviously grief stricken as are a lot of other people so stop trying to troll off peoples grief

He said:

"Why not, y'know, someone of a lesser, a lesser being, y'know, a lesser person. Y'know, someone without kids."

I don't think he necessarily meant it to mean that a person without kids is a lesser being, but the Indo accurately reported on what he did say.

Musketeer4

What's all this grief stricken stuff?

The only people grief stricken will be his family and close friends and colleagues. None of the rest of the people on the indo or elsewhere know him beyond and an aquaintence! Grief stricken? Give me a break! Theyll puff and blow about it for a few days and then move on to the next thing.

The likes of him are only shedding crocodile tears.

VinLieger

Phoebas wrote: »

He did:

Yeah I did listen to it he was in a state, so nice one to conveniently leave out the question marks completely altering the meaning of the quote, that is quite sickening to try and distort the words of someone in a place like that.

Immediately the questions that you have in life, they ring out. Why him? Why not me? Why not some other, lesser being? A lesser person? Someone without kids. It’s hard.”

Good god some people really will go to the ends of the earth to be offended by someone who is in a place lik this emotinally

VinLieger

Musketeer4 wrote: »

What's all this grief stricken stuff?

The only people grief stricken will be his family and close friends and colleagues. None of the rest of the people on the indo or elsewhere know him beyond and an aquaintence! Grief stricken? Give me a break! Theyll puff and blow about it for a few days and then move on to the next thing.

The likes of him are only shedding crocodile tears.

He was a team mate, but nice one showing of your belligerent ignorance of the facts and obviously not reading the article at all, he played with him countless times

“We had a few battles, playing for Shannon and Cork Constitution. We went on to play Munster schools together, Irish schools, right up to senior level. On numerous occasions I would have roomed with the guy. It’s just mind-boggling.”

They knew each other from childhood for god sake

While I don't think he meant people without kids are lesser human beings, he still said that someone without kids should die before people with kids.

However, in this case I'm going to believe that the man is shocked & grieving and that some journalist wouldn't leave him alone.
People say things in grief and shock that they don't really mean.

The Backwards Man

Phoebas wrote: »

Did either of you listen to the Sean O'Rourke interview?

The Indo headline accurately reflected what was said.

'It was like being hit with a sledgehammer'

'The questions you have in life, they ring out'

'Why him? Why not me?'

That's three headlines reflecting what he said and not one of them mildly trollish. That paper is nothing but a tabloid rag.

MintyMagnum

People are easily offended these days. I would take it to mean he's talking about someone who other people aren't dependent on and a realisation of how hard it is to lose a parent suddenly and not have them around while growing up. My two cents as a person without kids.

Phoebas

VinLieger wrote: »

Yeah I did listen to it he was in a state, so nice one to conveniently leave out the question marks completely altering the meaning of the quote, that is quite sickening to try and distort the words of someone in a place like that.

Who's distorting what he said? It completely clear that he was asking rhetorical questions, and the Indo's reporting, and the OP, included question marks (as if that was relevant).

Indo wrote:

"When the news filtered through yesterday it was, personally, for me, like being hit with a sledgehammer. Immediately the questions that you have in life, they ring out. Why him? Why not me? Why not some other, lesser being? A lesser person? Someone without kids. It’s hard.”

I don't know why people are getting overly upset by the Indo here.

Dbu

Personally I take whatever Corkery says as a pile of sh..e

Not so long ago he was tearing Foley apart in the press

Musketeer4

Honest to god though, do the likes of these people not have handlers and PR people that tell them what to say and what not to say.

And I don't buy it at all. Anyone that is genuinely grieving will want some quiet reflection time, not to be going around running their mouth to journalists and dishing out casual insults that offend half the population.

But hey, I suppose washed up rugby players need all the publicity they can get, right?
It sounds like a bit of a stunt to me and he should be ashamed of himself to be capitalising on Foley's passing to get his 5 minutes of fame by coming out making preposterous and inflammatory statements of faux grief.

VinLieger

Phoebas wrote: »

Who's distorting what he said? It completely clear that he was asking rhetorical questions, and the Indo's reporting, and the OP, included question marks (as if that was relevant).



I don't know why people are getting overly upset by the Indo here.

People distorting the facts that he said people without kids are lesser beings which he didnt, he posed 2 different rhetorical questions and then jumping on him for asking them in a way people dont agree with is disgusting, hes lost a close friend and I hope nobody ever picks apart the words you use bit by bit the next time you use someone close to find some meaningless insult you couldn't have possibly meant in what you say

Dbu wrote: »

Personally I take whatever Corkery says as a pile of sh..e

Not so long ago he was tearing Foley apart in the press

Maybe time to grow up and learn its possible to have a professional and personal opinions about people ehh?

timmy880

The lesser issue is what he said but The Independent clearly knew what they were doing.... It has become a complete clickbait rag and they love creating drama with sensationalist stories and headlines

Phoebas

VinLieger wrote: »

People distorting the facts that he said people without kids are lesser beings which he didnt, he posed 2 different rhetorical questions and then jumping on him for asking them in a way people dont agree with is disgusting, hes lost a close friend and I hope nobody ever picks apart the words you use bit by bit the next time you use someone close to find some meaningless insult you couldn't have possibly meant in what you say

Personally, as I've said, I don't think he was saying that people without kids are lesser beings - more of a 'the poor kids he left behind' kind of sentiment, imo.

But I didn't read that from the Indo story either. People inventing stuff that isn't really there - on either side of this.

ChikiChiki

Musketeer4 wrote: »

What's all this grief stricken stuff?

The only people grief stricken will be his family and close friends and colleagues. None of the rest of the people on the indo or elsewhere know him beyond and an aquaintence! Grief stricken? Give me a break! Theyll puff and blow about it for a few days and then move on to the next thing.

The likes of him are only shedding crocodile tears.

What an absolutely heartless moronic post completely lacking of empathy.

mynamejeff

Logo wrote: »

'Why Anthony Foley? Why not a lesser being? Someone without kids'.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/munster-rugby/why-anthony-foley-why-not-a-lesser-being-someone-without-kids-former-team-mate-on-the-mindboggling-tragedy-35136423.html

Maybe we could stone a few singles/gays who might be responsible enough to choose not to have children for personal reasons. Or maybe just abort lesser beings who are unable to procreate.

what an obnoxious post !!

even in the throws of grief a man isnt excused from you uber liberal agenda

why dont you go away and let people deal with a friends death how they like.

just a horrible selfish obnoxious sentiment from someone at the owrest possible time

Musketeer4

mynamejeff wrote: »

what an obnoxious post !!

even in the throws of grief a man isnt excused from you uber liberal agenda

why dont you go away and let people deal with a friends death how they like.

just a horrible selfish obnoxious sentiment from someone at the owrest possible time

If he was indeed in the throws of grief he'd not want to be talking to the papers. And even then, he should be thinking before speaking rather than just letting his mouth run offending people.

Don't be calling people out when its Corkery himself who is being obnoxious and judgemental af.

mynamejeff

Musketeer4 wrote: »

If he was indeed in the throws of grief he'd not want to be talking to the papers. And even then, he should be thinking before speaking rather than just letting his mouth run offending people.

or being hounded by slimy journalists

either way the this thread is offensive and obnoxious

i ll call people on unacceptable behavior as i see it thanks .

the disrespect on this thread really is sickening

Musketeer4

ChikiChiki wrote: »

What an absolutely heartless moronic post completely lacking of empathy.

And what about what Corkery said? Was he not moronic and obnoxious?

VinLieger

Musketeer4 wrote: »

If he was indeed in the throws of grief he'd not want to be talking to the papers. And even then, he should be thinking before speaking rather than just letting his mouth run offending people.

Don't be calling people out when its Corkery himself who is being obnoxious and judgemental af.

Your complete lack of empathy towards other people is absolutely disgusting

lawred2

Logo wrote: »

I realise the guy is probably deep in grief but why broadcast to the nation under those circumstances. It doesn't detract from the fact that he thinks childless people are lesser beings and have less to contribute to society.

yeah... no I wouldn't read it like that at all...

lawred2

Musketeer4 wrote: »

What's all this grief stricken stuff?

The only people grief stricken will be his family and close friends and colleagues. None of the rest of the people on the indo or elsewhere know him beyond and an aquaintence! Grief stricken? Give me a break! Theyll puff and blow about it for a few days and then move on to the next thing.

The likes of him are only shedding crocodile tears.

He was a team mate and knew the man personally.

But all the other gobsheens outside of family, friends, colleagues and ex team mates need to cop onto themselves with their competitive grieving..

Musketeer4

lawred2 wrote: »

He was a team mate and knew the man personally.

But all the other gobsheens outside of family, friends, colleagues and ex team mates need to cop onto themselves with their competitive grieving..

Fair enough he's probably genuinely upset but that's no excuse to go around insulting and questioning the value of the life of someone who has no children. I am offended by the insinuation and I'm sure lots of people are.

But besides him you are right. The amount of faux, manufactured grief we're seeing in the media the last 2 days reminds me of the sort of crap that came out of North Korea when Kim Jong Il and his aul lad died.
But hey, it's a line of reporting that'll get plenty clicks and sell papers. It's all about getting them likes, brah.
And then you have the RIP thread with people who probably never even clapped eyes on him posting like they're on the brink of tears. I just find it nauseating.

VinLieger wrote: »

Your complete lack of empathy towards other people is absolutely disgusting

Oh come on.

lawred2

Musketeer4 wrote: »

Fair enough he's probably genuinely upset but that's no excuse to go around insulting and questioning the value of the life of someone who has no children. I am offended by the insinuation and I'm sure lots of people are.

But besides him you are right. The amount of faux, manufactured grief we're seeing in the media the last 2 days reminds me of the sort of crap that came out of North Korea when Kim Jong Il and his aul lad died.
But hey, it's a line of reporting that'll get plenty clicks and sell papers. It's all about getting them likes, brah.
And then you have the RIP thread with people who probably never even clapped eyes on him posting like they're on the brink of tears. I just find it nauseating.

Agree with everything except the bit where he qualified lesser people as those without children...

There was a definite or involved.

All deaths of young people are tragic but fair or not I would feel that it's that little bit more upsetting to see young children left without a parent..

Maybe that's because I'm using my own kids as context.

Musketeer4

I'm surprised that no-one has called him out on the "lesser person" thing in its own right. I think it's fairly digusting of him to suggest that oh, theres a lesser person over there - they should drop dead before this other person of higher value. Its just a very bad attitute. So yeah, why didn't Corkery drop dead in his sleep?

Tasden

Musketeer4 wrote: »

I'm surprised that no-one has called him out on the "lesser person" thing in its own right. I think it's fairly digusting of him to suggest that oh, theres a lesser person over there - they should drop dead before this other person of higher value. Its just a very bad attitute. So yeah, why didn't Corkery drop dead in his sleep?

He did ask that himself.

Musketeer4

Maybe he should have

gramar

Musketeer4 wrote: »

Honest to god though, do the likes of these people not have handlers and PR people that tell them what to say and what not to say.

Why would a long retired rugby player have a handler or a PR person?
For the same reason you don't although a few on here might think you should have.

Mr. CooL ICE

Mod:

Musketeer4, you have already been banned from the Anthony Foley thread for speculating about his death and now you are suggesting David Corkery should have dropped dead. I don't even know where to begin...

Post in this thread again and you will be banned. Post in any thread relating to Anthony Foley and you will be banned.

Henry Ford III

It's the Indo. The real folly is expecting anything better from it.

Lollipop95

I don't know who David Corkery is but you really can't judge unless you've listened to the interview. I happened to hear it this morning and you're not taking into context his tone of voice. He sounded completely bereft, it's not like he said "someone without children" in a cold, emotionless voice.
By "lesser person" I would've thought it was fairly obvious a person who has done very bad things in their life and doesn't necessarily deserve to live become of the horrendous crimes they've committed. There are countless murderers and rapists waking up everyday perfectly fine and healthy. How is that fair? He has a point.

And when he said "someone without children", again I thought it was fairly obvious that he meant it's tragic and horrible to lose a parent at a young age and nobody should have to go through such a terrible event...children are always naturally thought of/put first. My parents know of people who've lost a partner and some people would say about the couple (in a very misguided attempt to console themselves maybe or the partner left behind) "well at least they didn't have kids".

But that's for a separate discussion and has no place in this thread.
I didn't know of Anthony Foley until yesterday as I don't follow sport but how very sad and my thoughts go out to his wife and kids..42 is WAY too young to be taken from this world

arayess

i don't care about his grief...we've all had grief and not come out with bull**** like that.

he asked why couldn't it have been some lesser person?

who is he to judge somebody's worth?
or suggest a person trade places with foley cos they were lesser than foley

the groutch

Holograph wrote: »

I choose to interpret that as "a lesser being or someone without kids" - the guy, in the throes of grief, asks a few of those rhetorical question but the Indo, being its classy self, just puts those bits in the headline and makes them look joined together.

even so, the comment does suggest that if someone is to die before their time, it should be someone without kids rather than him, and indirectly devalues the life of somebody who for whatever reason hasn't parented any children.

gormdubhgorm

Logo wrote: »

'Why Anthony Foley? Why not a lesser being? Someone without kids'.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/munster-rugby/why-anthony-foley-why-not-a-lesser-being-someone-without-kids-former-team-mate-on-the-mindboggling-tragedy-35136423.html

Maybe we could stone a few singles/gays who might be responsible enough to choose not to have children for personal reasons. Or maybe just abort lesser beings who are unable to procreate.

I happened to hear this bit live myself while I was in a dentists waiting room, and thought some smart @rse is going to pick this up on the net. The exact phrasing was a "lesser being (pause corrected himself) or someone without children".

Congratulations OP you are that smart @rse....

Corkery got his phrasing muddled while he was live on air, barely able to hold himself together talking about his mate. His mate who has died unexpectedly and died young. A mate who has left two kids behind him.

Personally I try and turn the radio/tv off when a celebrity dies because the interviewer has to thread very lightly. The interviewer only ends up using cliches, and people/media who half know the celebrity are interviewed and they use cliches as well. Meanwhile their real friends struggle to speak to the media in any coherent way because of grief. I always feel like it is an intrusion into someone else's grief and it is not for me to be listening to.

Any eejit listening to it live would know Corkery meant..."a person not as decent as my mate, a person who has not the misfortune to leave two young kids fatherless".

Tasden

the groutch wrote: »

even so, the comment does suggest that if someone is to die before their time, it should be someone without kids rather than him, and indirectly devalues the life of somebody who for whatever reason hasn't parented any children.

Or it suggests that the death of a person with kids means children are left without a dad, it seems more unfair to have children mourn their father than for people who are older and less reliant on the person who just died. It is just him thinking of the children losing their Dad, something that doesn't happen with those who have no children. It was a rhetorical question asked in grief, I don't see why people are looking for malice in something that was said in grief.

lawred2

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

I happened to hear this bit live myself while I was in a dentists waiting room, and thought some smart @rse is going to pick this up on the net. The exact phrasing was a "lesser being (pause corrected himself) or someone without children".

Congratulations OP you are that smart @rse....

Corkery got his phrasing muddled while he was live on air, barely able to hold himself together talking about his mate. His mate who has died unexpectedly and died young. A mate who has left two kids behind him.

Personally I try and turn the radio/tv off when a celebrity dies because the interviewer has to thread very lightly. The interviewer only ends up using cliches, and people/media who half know the celebrity are interviewed and they use cliches as well. Meanwhile their real friends struggle to speak to the media in any coherent way because of grief. I always feel like it is an intrusion into someone else's grief and it is not for me to be listening to.

Any eejit listening to it live would know Corkery meant..."a person not as decent as my mate, a person who has not the misfortune to leave two young kids fatherless".

It amazes me that anyone would seek to interpret such words in such a twisted way as the op did..

gormdubhgorm

lawred2 wrote: »

It amazes me that anyone would seek to interpret such words in such a twisted way as the op did..

In fairness to the OP reading the title of the Indo it would make you think that way (if he/she did not hear the interview). The Indo knew what they were doing and went for the juicy headline. It worked.

It just shows you that what the media print is a lot different to the spoken word and the context of those words.

I am surprised with the Indo as they are supposed to be above the tabloid level.

lawred2

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

In fairness to the OP reading the title of the Indo it would make you think that way (if he/she did not hear the interview). The Indo knew what they were doing and went for the juicy headline. It worked.

It just shows you that what the media print is a lot different to the spoken word and the context of those words.

I am surprised with the Indo as they are supposed to be above the tabloid level.

The indo is below tabloid level

Sound Bite

A bad choice of words from a grieving man. Nothing more, nothing less.

I don't have kids and I'm not offended my his comments in the least. It's not unusual to think of someone's kids when they die and naturally it's upsetting to think they will grow up without him and that he will miss out on seeing them grow up.

Amelia99

I think his choice of words was unfortunate but the guy was obviously not thinking straight. He has previously spoken out about his struggle with depression so maybe that played a part in the way he reacted.

I think the main blame lies with the Indo in making a headline out of the part of his interview they knew would be contraversial and generate negativity. That paper really does have a vile editorial culture.

old boy

the gist of it all is that we are gone too pc

Holograph

arayess wrote: »

i don't care about his grief...we've all had grief and not come out with bull**** like that.

he asked why couldn't it have been some lesser person?

who is he to judge somebody's worth?
or suggest a person trade places with foley cos they were lesser than foley

Think he just meant someone who was not as great a person (in his opinion) as the deceased.
Asking why it could not have been someone without children was badly phrased all right but I think he just meant, although verbalised pretty terribly, that it was worse again that he had a young family.

Your Face

The Bindo was counting on a thick person to misinterpret their faeces of an article.

VinLieger

Your Face wrote: »

The Bindo was counting on a thick person to misinterpret their faeces of an article.

And they found several prime candidates on here