nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Second Captains

ballsymchugh

Thought I'd update the OP with links and stuff for anyone who stumbles across this.

The former Off the Ball hosts have partnered with The Irish Times to do a series of weekly podcasts. They go online each Tuesday and cover a variety of sports, with a number of contributors including Sid Lowe, Richie Sadlier, Gerry Thornley and Shane Horgan.

They can be found:
On The Irish Times' site: http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/second-captains
On Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/secondcaptains-it-com
On iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/ie/podcast/second-captains-irish-times/id647893016?mt=2

Or if you prefer not to use iTunes for your podcasts, use this link in whatever app you use (Thanks to youcancallmeal): http://feeds.feedburner.com/secondcaptainsitcom

And here are their Twitter and Facebook accounts.

Cheers,
wnolan1992

so they're almost finished their gardening leave...

where will they end up?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

al87987

Beersmith wrote: »

Those 3 had nothing to do with the loan system. Chelsea manager didn't fancy them.

Its a lot easier to fancy a player if you see them play regularly though. As good as a loan can be, making an impact at your parent club, even in training, I find would leave you in a better position than having a stormer on loan as all 3 above did.

Loans means nothing to a manager who isn't benefiting directly from your play at all, management is far too short-term these days for these long-term loan strategies.

Arghus

Dots1982 wrote: »

Marcotti was right.

Marcotti made some fair points and he's knowledgeable enough - no doubting that.

I don't really have a problem with what he has to say - just how he says it.

His smug, condescending tone is atrocious and he's totally charmless. Remember the live show with him as a guest? Utter car crash stuff: Marcotti was about as funny that night as terminal cancer, yet thought he was Richard Pryor.

corwill

I'm not sure I've ever had a good word to say about Marcotti, but I'll grudgingly admit to not finding him so bad this time around.

Ivefoundgod

Don't get the hate for Miguel and Marcotti myself although I see get your point about him but its just his personality. Anyone listen to the political pod from today? About half way through it but find Colm Tobin hard work and Ken hasn't really questioned anything he's said at all, its just one side of the argument so far.

Dots1982

I'll take marcotti or Delaney over sadlier. X5SADS seems to have a media career due to being a nice guy and Millwall stories.

Also liked Ken been challenged. It's far too cosy in the SC studio, murph is clearly in awe of Ken and Mcdevitt could challenge Ken a little more occasionally aswell.

Say Your Number

What's the story with this perceived Anti-Cork bias, what the f*ck is wrong with them down there?

Eoin's recollection of the bike accident was funny, his delivery of 'Aww f*ck' made me laugh out loud.

corwill

Say Your Number wrote: »

What's the story with this perceived Anti-Cork bias, what the f*ck is wrong with them down there?

They're convinced no-one else likes them. There's a reason for that. It's true.

dulux99

Dots1982 wrote: »

Also liked Ken been challenged. It's far too cosy in the SC studio, murph is clearly in awe of Ken and Mcdevitt could challenge Ken a little more occasionally aswell.

I agree with this. I thought it was interesting on on one of the recent pods where Eoin mentioned that he felt Ken went a bit too far with the Mourinho bashing sometimes. I was thinking it'd be nice for him to be pulled on it every now and then rather than it being one way traffic the whole time.

Ken will be in good form Monday I imagine with that Huddersfield result

JoseJones

dulux99 wrote: »

I know everyone seems to be of the same opinion but I can't echo this enough. He is the most unlikeable person I've ever heard on a sports podcast and I listen to my fair share of them

Two words, Graham Hunter.

Running Balance

corwill wrote:

They're convinced no-one else likes them. There's a reason for that. It's true.

Yeah just because they are paranoid doesn't mean everyone isn't talking about them..langers

Arghus

You can put those pitchforks away, Tom Humphries is a subject today.

Turns out it's hard to talk about ongoing courtcases!

Icemancometh

They're covering the Humphries story today

Baggly

Glad Ken called him what he is. A convicted pedophile.

Raisins

They dealt with the tom humphries story very well. They'd obviously put thought and prep into it. I remember they were very measured on the Ched Evans case previously too.

riemann

Icemancometh wrote: »

They're covering the Humphries story today

Think I'll skip this one, might make for uncomfortable listening. No matter how serious the subject matter, how it makes me feel is the most important thing.

riemann

Arghus wrote: »

Turns out it's hard to talk about ongoing courtcases!

So difficult, explains why no one has heard of this case since the initial charge in 2011 and conviction several weeks ago.

Baggly

riemann wrote:

Think I'll skip this one, might make for uncomfortable listening. No matter how serious the subject matter, how it makes me feel is the most important thing.

riemann wrote:

So difficult, explains why no one has heard of this case since the initial charge in 2011 and conviction several weeks ago.

Maybe people didn't want to hear about it because it made them uncomfortable.

Arghus

riemann wrote: »

So difficult, explains why no one has heard of this case since the initial charge in 2011 and conviction several weeks ago.

Personally, I'd rather hear their opinions after proceedings in court have ran their course and then they can talk freely about the entirety of the information that exists in the public domain.

But, sure, they could have done a half assed job on it because outrage.

HelloMuddha

HelloMuddha wrote: »

Has there been any mention of the David Walsh letter for Tom Humphries this week? I think I've listened to everything but do fall asleep on the train on occasion.

Would be disappointed if they don't deal with it. I signed up at the start with the hope that the lads would branch out a bit more into journalism, its got the price point spot on to be honest, I won't unsubscribe but the output is very mixed.

I think I was the first one on the thread to mention the Tom Humphries case. It can be noted that I referenced it not attempting to incite a mob brandishing pitchforks but more with reference to David Walsh's character reference.

I've to listen back to the piece, I was initially quite disappointed with the conversation about it, but initial reaction; The discussion was completely dominated by Ken, and with Eoin trying to act as the facilitator you're left with Murph not really offering a huge amount to the discussion. Ken's point of view seemed to accept that character references have a place just that it was poor judgement by both Walsh and Cusack to provide them. I personally would fundamentally disagree, they've no place in such a case. Simples. Too open to abuse by the (eh) great and the good in society. This is a recurring problem, Ken just going on long monologues and talking to himself without really being challenged.

Considering they've had weeks to pull together a piece on it I'll remain disappointed in the coverage of it. There are many strands to the story that could be explored, it's not the first time a high-profile GAA personality has given such a reference in such a case for example.

Might have more considered thoughts to provide on a re-listen, I'll shout them at people on the train tomorrow if no one hear wants to listen

batistuta9

of the ball said they weren't covering it tonight as the couldn't get the guests they wanted, think they're doing it tomorrow now

Raisins

HelloMuddha wrote: »

I think I was the first one on the thread to mention the Tom Humphries case. It can be noted that I referenced it not attempting to incite a mob brandishing pitchforks but more with reference to David Walsh's character reference.

I've to listen back to the piece, I was initially quite disappointed with the conversation about it, but initial reaction; The discussion was completely dominated by Ken, and with Eoin trying to act as the facilitator you're left with Murph not really offering a huge amount to the discussion. Ken's point of view seemed to accept that character references have a place just that it was poor judgement by both Walsh and Cusack to provide them. I personally would fundamentally disagree, they've no place in such a case. Simples. Too open to abuse by the (eh) great and the good in society. This is a recurring problem, Ken just going on long monologues and talking to himself without really being challenged.

Considering they've had weeks to pull together a piece on it I'll remain disappointed in the coverage of it. There are many strands to the story that could be explored, it's not the first time a high-profile GAA personality has given such a reference in such a case for example.

Might have more considered thoughts to provide on a re-listen, I'll shout them at people on the train tomorrow if no one hear wants to listen

I don't agree, any accused convicted of an offence is entitled to put a character reference before the Court. If you don't agree with that then you can argue that it should be abolished but while it exists then humphries was entitled to do it.

It's not open only to the great and good in society. It's a means through which a barrister running a plea in mitigation can set out the background to an offenders life through a written narrative. A serial offender with 10 previous convictions for theft can have a character reference before the court from an employer or a charity were he or she volunteers etc. It's only a very minor feature of the process.

The problem with Walsh IMO is

1. The reference refers to the GAA etc even though that's how he found and groomed the victim

2. The radio interview he gave where he said I know tom and I know more about this case than anyone and he's a fine man. That's utterly disgraceful. I can't imagine how's I'd feel listening to that on the radio if I was the victim or her parents. He deserves to lose his job for that.

3. His arrogance that he is "bruised" now by the criticism even though he's refused to answer questions in a same way he'd destroy a cyclist if the shoe was on the other foot

The Davestator

HelloMuddha wrote: »

I think I was the first one on the thread to mention the Tom Humphries case. It can be noted that I referenced it not attempting to incite a mob brandishing pitchforks but more with reference to David Walsh's character reference.

I've to listen back to the piece, I was initially quite disappointed with the conversation about it, but initial reaction; The discussion was completely dominated by Ken, and with Eoin trying to act as the facilitator you're left with Murph not really offering a huge amount to the discussion. Ken's point of view seemed to accept that character references have a place just that it was poor judgement by both Walsh and Cusack to provide them. I personally would fundamentally disagree, they've no place in such a case. Simples. Too open to abuse by the (eh) great and the good in society. This is a recurring problem, Ken just going on long monologues and talking to himself without really being challenged.

Considering they've had weeks to pull together a piece on it I'll remain disappointed in the coverage of it. There are many strands to the story that could be explored, it's not the first time a high-profile GAA personality has given such a reference in such a case for example.

Might have more considered thoughts to provide on a re-listen, I'll shout them at people on the train tomorrow if no one hear wants to listen

So your main problem with it was that you didn't agree with Kens opinion?

That's just tough tbh.

Baggly

I believe there is an element of restraint needed in exploring the strands of the case as well - for the sake of the victim rather than anyone else. They had to live through the details of the ordeal twice, and now the media is looking into it, they have to relive the details again. Thankfully, there does seem to be restraint in going into every detail.

I disagree the piece was dominated by Ken - a lot of Eoin's words stuck with me.

And on your second last note, about other people from the GAA offer references - i thought this was one element they covered well - GAA personalities sticking their oar in on cases they dont have the full details on.

HelloMuddha

The Davestator wrote: »

So your main problem with it was that you didn't agree with Kens opinion?

That's just tough tbh.

Yeah, I suppose it is tough. No problem with that. I choose to listen to the pod and do regularly disagree with Ken and his fairly smug liberal opinions.

It is however a recurring problem with the pod, it descends into the Ken show. He's both it's greatest strength and it's greatest weakness. The show yesterday would've benefited from someone else being on the panel. Sinead O Carroll has been underutilised as a contributor and while I find him insufferable as a twitter personality Ewan McKenna wrote a truly excellent piece that was published in the indo.

al87987

Ken is definitely the strongest thing about the podcast. Can't imagine many people would pay the sub for Eoin and Murph although I do enjoy both of them.

dastardly00

For anyone who hasn't heard it. here's a link to the Matt Cooper interview with David Walsh, which was originally recorded in December 2012 but only broadcasted on October 9th 2017

https://www.todayfm.com/I-Find-It-Incredible-That-David-Walsh-Gave-A-Character-Reference-To-Tom-Humphries

Raisins

Does anyone know when Ken had that interview with Roy Keane where he called him out on Saipan? It's in the audio mash up. Is it available anywhere?

lawred2

Ivefoundgod wrote: »

Don't get the hate for Miguel and Marcotti myself although I see get your point about him but its just his personality. Anyone listen to the political pod from today? About half way through it but find Colm Tobin hard work and Ken hasn't really questioned anything he's said at all, its just one side of the argument so far.

Just listened to Colm Tobin... So full of generalisations and stereotypes..

It's clear he was talking about the middle class high brow Catalan circles that he moved in or moves in whenever he visits.

rufuseric82

riemann wrote: »

So difficult, explains why no one has heard of this case since the initial charge in 2011 and conviction several weeks ago.

There was no discussion from when he was charged to when he pleaded guilty as there were reporting restrictions in place.

Ol' Donie

al87987 wrote: »

Ken is definitely the strongest thing about the podcast. Can't imagine many people would pay the sub for Eoin and Murph although I do enjoy both of them.

The Reverend of Irreverance is amazing but it's a team effort. Wouldn't be the same without any of them.