All Ireland SHC Final (formerly SHC thread) - READ MOD NOTE POST #1

danganabu · 26-06-2017 05:34PM

Them stats re Munster Champions are completely skewed by the fact that KK were winning pretty much every AI and would have done so regardless of what province they were in.

DEFTLEFTHAND · 26-06-2017 05:38PM

PTH2009 wrote: »

Offaly will put it up too Waterford esp in Tullamore (might move it to Birr). A loss for Waterford would be an absolute disaster

Expect wins for Tipp (massive win infact) over Westmeath and Dublin will get a big challenge of Laois but should come out on top

Horrible draw for Limerick away too Kilkenny but could go either way if Limerick have one of there good days. Still I'd expect Kilkenny too win at home. I imagine that will be the only game televised

They really should move all Offaly hurling to Birr, but I guess O'Connor Park has to generate as much revenue as possible after the renovations.

dastardly00 · 26-06-2017 05:53PM

thomond2006 wrote: »

https://gaa.tickets.ie/Listing/EventInformation/35650/gaa-all-ireland-shc-qualifiers-round-1-kilkenny-v-limerick-nowlan-park-1-July-2017

Tickets aren't being released for KK vs LIM until 10am Friday?!

It's working now thomond.
Tickets for the Old and New Stands are available.

C__MC · 26-06-2017 06:00PM

I actually think kk got a decent draw. By 8.45 next Saturday night, we will know a lot about them and where they are at. As for Tipp and w ford, noting will be known. Kk will be up to a good speed by the following week if they win and could be match sharper then the other two

dastardly00 · 26-06-2017 06:09PM

C__MC wrote: »

I actually think kk got a decent draw. By 8.45 next Saturday night, we will know a lot about them and where they are at. As for Tipp and w ford, noting will be known. Kk will be up to a good speed by the following week if they win and could be match sharper then the other two

Or KK could be quite fatigued whereas Tipp/Waterford/Dublin will be very fresh...

HurlingRanker · 26-06-2017 07:37PM

danganabu wrote: »

Them stats re Munster Champions are completely skewed by the fact that KK were winning pretty much every AI and would have done so regardless of what province they were in.

Not true. Of the nine times the Munster champion lost their next game only twice did Kilkenny knock them out. The other 7 times Kilkenny successfully navigated their semi final. The point is, Kilkenny can cope with the 5/6 wait. Munster champions often struggle with it. Two times out of nine does not skew the stats.

27-06-2017 07:37PM

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2017/0627/885909-gleeson/

It was known he was going to court for stealing money but I don't think it was public to where he stole it.

He's lucky we have overcrowded prisons so ppl like him get away with stuff like that.

What a low life to rob an old man like that... puts Connollys conviction in a much better light.

I hope he's roundly booed for the rest of the summer tbh.

mickmackey1 · 27-06-2017 07:44PM

gilberto_eire wrote: »

puts Connollys conviction in a much better light.

That's one way of looking at it I suppose... :rolleyes:

jelutong · 27-06-2017 07:59PM

Will Tipperary drop him from the panel I wonder? They should do in my opinion.

Bonniedog · 27-06-2017 09:25PM

Did Gleeson even pay the money back? dirt bag.

Rasputin11 · 27-06-2017 09:38PM

Bonniedog wrote: »

Did Gleeson even pay the money back? dirt bag.

Paid back alright.

mountgomery burns · 29-06-2017 08:06AM

Everyone knew this already, it didn't come out yesterday.

danganabu · 29-06-2017 01:26PM

gilberto_eire wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2017/0627/885909-gleeson/

It was known he was going to court for stealing money but I don't think it was public to where he stole it.

He's lucky we have overcrowded prisons so ppl like him get away with stuff like that.

What a low life to rob an old man like that... puts Connollys conviction in a much better light.

I hope he's roundly booed for the rest of the summer tbh.

jelutong wrote: »

Will Tipperary drop him from the panel I wonder? They should do in my opinion.

While not in anyway trying to excuse or justify crime, of which one was clearly committed here, there were very pertinent extenuating circumstances in the case that should be taken into account, and which clearly were by the judiciary.

Yes the money was paid back in full at the first opportunity, in fact the victim wasn't even aware of the theft until it was paid back.

No idea how anyone could come to the conclusion that Tipp should feel some moral obligation to drop him for something that has absolutely nothing to do with the GAA, I'm sure there are dozens of players in this years championship that have criminal records.

GoldFour4 · 29-06-2017 01:39PM

The lad he took the money from has said that he wants Gleeson to continue hurling for Tipperary. That's enough to justify keeping him on the panel imo.

Bonniedog · 29-06-2017 01:40PM

Losing your bollix gambling is not an "extenuating circumstance" for stealing from anyone.

Kerrydude1981 · 29-06-2017 01:45PM

Interesting article about Richie Hogan

http://www.gaa.ie/hurling/news/richie-hogan-puts-career-hold-for-hurling/

danganabu · 29-06-2017 01:46PM

Bonniedog wrote: »

Losing your bollix gambling is not an "extenuating circumstance" for stealing from anyone.

Of course it is, it doesn't justify it, but it is an extenuating circumstance, perhaps mitigating would be a better choice of words but the premise is still the same, unless you don't accept that Gambling Addiction is not a disease?

Dyr · 29-06-2017 03:23PM

danganabu wrote: »

Of course it is, it doesn't justify it, but it is an extenuating circumstance, perhaps mitigating would be a better choice of words but the premise is still the same, unless you don't accept that Gambling Addiction is not a disease?

Is thieving a disease too?

There's plenty of illnesses that preclude people from certain activities and I would think twice about sticking someone with a massive gambling problem in the nets :eek:

danganabu · 29-06-2017 03:31PM

Bambi wrote: »

Is thieving a disease too?

There's plenty of illnesses that preclude people from certain activities and I would think twice about sticking someone with a massive gambling problem in the nets :eek:

Well thankfully as far as I know you are neither and inter-county manager ( if you are, Hi babs

) nor a professional in the area of rehabilitation or treatment.

Bonniedog · 29-06-2017 03:39PM

danganabu wrote: »

Of course it is, it doesn't justify it, but it is an extenuating circumstance, perhaps mitigating would be a better choice of words but the premise is still the same, unless you don't accept that Gambling Addiction is not a disease?

Cancer is a disease, multiple sclerosis is a disease, Alzheimers is a disease.

People afflicted by those have no choice, Gamblers and drinkers do. It's called free will. As is decision to rob an old man.

Martin567 · 29-06-2017 03:42PM

danganabu wrote: »

Of course it is, it doesn't justify it, but it is an extenuating circumstance, perhaps mitigating would be a better choice of words but the premise is still the same, unless you don't accept that Gambling Addiction is not a disease?

You are normally a very reasonable poster but this is one of the most extraordinary statements I've read in some time.

'Extenuating' or 'Mitigating' mean to explain/excuse or reduce in severity the offence in some way. Does the existence of large debts, gambling or otherwise, really mitigate the offence of financial theft?

Of course gambling addiction is a disease. But he wasn't in court charged with having gambling debts. He was in court charged with financial theft. There are no mitigating factors for that. Those might be the reasons why he did it but they are not extenuating or mitigating in any way.

danganabu · 29-06-2017 03:46PM

Bonniedog wrote: »

People afflicted by those have no choice, Gamblers and drinkers do. It's called free will.

If you genuinely believe that then I'm sorry but you have no idea and I mean zero idea of what you are talking about, addiction is not something that can simply be avoided by ''free will'' the very notion that it can is ludicrous.

danganabu · 29-06-2017 03:51PM

Martin567 wrote: »

You are normally a very reasonable poster but this is one of the most extraordinary statements I've read in some time.

'Extenuating' or 'Mitigating' mean to explain/excuse or reduce in severity the offence in some way. Does the existence of large debts, gambling or otherwise, really mitigate the offence of financial theft?

Of course gambling addiction is a disease. But he wasn't in court charged with having gambling debts. He was in court charged with financial theft. There are no mitigating factors for that. Those might be the reasons why he did it but they are not extenuating or mitigating in any way.

Wow wow back up a little I never claimed that his personal demons and addictions in anyway justified his actions, merely that they were factors that should be considered when labelling his as a scum bag and a low life as some have done on here.

We obviously have different understandings of the term mitigating if you for one second thought I was trying to justify the crime or to exonerate the offender. The legal definition of mitigating circumstances is ;

Circumstances that may be considered by a court in determining culpability of a defendant or the extent of damages to be awarded to a plaintiff. Mitigating circumstances do not justify or excuse an offense but may reduce the severity of a charge. Similarly, a recognition of mitigating circumstances to reduce a damage award does not imply that the damages were not suffered but that they have been partially ameliorated.

and IMO that is exactly what this case represents.

Martin567 · 29-06-2017 04:02PM

danganabu wrote: »

Wow wow back up a little I never claimed that his personal demons and addictions in anyway justified his actions, merely that they were factors that should be considered when labelling his as a scum bag and a low life as some have done on here.

We obviously have different understandings of the term mitigating if you for one second thought I was trying to justify the crime or to exonerate the offender. The legal definition of mitigating circumstances is ;

Circumstances that may be considered by a court in determining culpability of a defendant or the extent of damages to be awarded to a plaintiff. Mitigating circumstances do not justify or excuse an offense but may reduce the severity of a charge. Similarly, a recognition of mitigating circumstances to reduce a damage award does not imply that the damages were not suffered but that they have been partially ameliorated.

and IMO that is exactly what this case represents.

Sorry to say I would have more sympathy for the point of view you are arguing against (in bold above) than I would for your contribution.

While I would have some sympathy for someone with a gambling addiction, I can have none for the offence committed. Unfortunately those labels are not too far wrong.

danganabu · 29-06-2017 04:13PM

Martin567 wrote: »

Sorry to say I would have more sympathy for the point of view you are arguing against (in bold above) than I would for your contribution.

While I would have some sympathy for someone with a gambling addiction, I can have none for the offence committed. Unfortunately those labels are not too far wrong.

Well like everything I guess its a matte of opinion and as someone who has worked in counselling and treatment I personally would have more sympathy than contempt for someone in his position and I know it probably looks like I'm simply going to bat for a fellow county man but I can hand on heart say that county allegiances have nothing to do with this, its an area I have a lot of experience and expertise in and while to someone on the outside it may seem like the actions of a scumbag the reality is that he would have been in the grip of an incredibly powerful disease and it is exactly that, a disease.

Read Oisin McConvilles autobiography or the interviews that Davy Glennon did on gambling addiction and how it changes your entire personality and moral fibre and then tell me like a previous poster has tried to claim that it can all be simply avoided or treated with free will.

Django99 · 30-06-2017 12:01AM

I would agree with danganabu here in that, while his actions seem deplorable and an unimaginable thing for most people to do, calling him a scumbag or anything like that doesn't really help anyone.

I would have to say though that I don't think he should be playing inter county hurling anymore. I can't imagine it's helpful for either him nor the Tipp set up.

From his own point of view the matter is more in the public eye because he is a county player, which can't be helpful for him nor his family or friends to be reading about it in media and online comments, which are almost all going to be negative.

Same for the Tipp panel, in pure hurling terms it's a distraction they could do without, and I would have to imagine it would be nigh on impossible for his focus to be at the same level as other inter county players with this going on in his life.

Gambling addiction is a real problem and can hit athletes and such harder than some of the general population, not to say that anyone is immune from being susceptible.

It does absolutely no one any good to label someone a scum bag or to simply put it down to a bad decision.

Bad decisions are made for a reason and while it's easy to judge (and this particular case is quite disturbing to read about) we should be able to appreciate that a person is where they are in their life for a whole multitude of reasons and a lot of them are external.

Rather than condemn those that commit these atrocities, the way forward is to allow the legal system (flawed as it may be) to deal with crimes, but also to try to prevent them from happening again.

The first step towards doing this is to show at least some degree of empathy and try to understand why a person would commit this crime, and not simply put it down to being a scum bag.

I know this post is mostly non hurling related but I think relevant given the increasing number of high profile cases involving GAA players, both on the field and off it.

aidan24326 · 30-06-2017 12:51AM

gilberto_eire wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2017/0627/885909-gleeson/

It was known he was going to court for stealing money but I don't think it was public to where he stole it.

He's lucky we have overcrowded prisons so ppl like him get away with stuff like that.

What a low life to rob an old man like that... puts Connollys conviction in a much better light.

I hope he's roundly booed for the rest of the summer tbh.

And I hope he isn't.

What he did was wrong and nobody is condoning it, but it has to be considered in the wider context of severe financial problems borne out of a gambling addiction and business losses, and the mental effects thereof.

He did a bad and a very stupid thing and I'm sure he is ashamed of it now, and the courts have dealt with it, so let's not go lining up to be judge and jury here.

OldMrBrennan83 · 30-06-2017 06:53AM

This post has been deleted.

Mantis Toboggan · 30-06-2017 07:36AM

Patww79 wrote: »

Jaysus you can get a ay with anything these days if you call it a 'disease'. Tipperary are letting themselves down by keeping him around.

Well he's not in the team for tomorrow so let's just move on.

citykat · 30-06-2017 10:00AM

Django99 wrote: »

I would agree with danganabu here in that, while his actions seem deplorable and an unimaginable thing for most people to do, calling him a scumbag or anything like that doesn't really help anyone.

I would have to say though that I don't think he should be playing inter county hurling anymore. I can't imagine it's helpful for either him nor the Tipp set up.

From his own point of view the matter is more in the public eye because he is a county player, which can't be helpful for him nor his family or friends to be reading about it in media and online comments, which are almost all going to be negative.

Same for the Tipp panel, in pure hurling terms it's a distraction they could do without, and I would have to imagine it would be nigh on impossible for his focus to be at the same level as other inter county players with this going on in his life.

Gambling addiction is a real problem and can hit athletes and such harder than some of the general population, not to say that anyone is immune from being susceptible.

It does absolutely no one any good to label someone a scum bag or to simply put it down to a bad decision.

Bad decisions are made for a reason and while it's easy to judge (and this particular case is quite disturbing to read about) we should be able to appreciate that a person is where they are in their life for a whole multitude of reasons and a lot of them are external.

Rather than condemn those that commit these atrocities, the way forward is to allow the legal system (flawed as it may be) to deal with crimes, but also to try to prevent them from happening again.

The first step towards doing this is to show at least some degree of empathy and try to understand why a person would commit this crime, and not simply put it down to being a scum bag.

I know this post is mostly non hurling related but I think relevant given the increasing number of high profile cases involving GAA players, both on the field and off it.

Ah jaysus. Atrocity is a bit strong.

All Ireland SHC Final (formerly SHC thread) - READ MOD NOTE POST #1

Comments