Under-age training misconduct

BrianBoru00 · 23-05-2018 06:48PM

blanch152 wrote: »

No, it isn't important to try to deliver a full view of what exactly is the story. The only part of the story that is relevant is the handling of the complaint by the club. Who was right or wrong in relation to the various incidents complained of is completely immaterial.

I believe that the GAA has come out of this really really well. There was a dreadful breach of procedure by a club and they have been sanctioned very very heavily. The club has come out very very badly, and I would not send a child to that club as a result.

Sweet Jesus

evolving_doors · 23-05-2018 07:12PM

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

Well what is most discussion on the internet, if not largely speculation? I don't think people can really be blamed for that. Indeed, many articles in papers are speculation also, or at the very least, one persons take on an event. I think some people seem to think that kimmage's take is gospel and the guy has just been before the courts.
Id agree on the details you outlined above, but I'd also feel that it is important to try to deliver a full view of what exactly is the story, and the more information people have to make a decision the better I believe.
I think kimmage wasn't really looking to do that, and his article reflected as much. To what end, I am speculating, but I would say he is pushing the stereotype of the over-aggressive, bad tempered gaa coach, who smokes in the dressing room, only cares about a win and horses young lads out of it at every opportunity, something like the d'unbelievables manager skit from years ago.

No more information has been forthcoming in this thread or any other news source (open to correction) to attempt to deliver a 'full view'. Only thing i see is speculation on the supposed ulterior motives of the journalist and parents, arguing to the absurd and people bemoaning the loss of a season for kids, who are apparently 'the real victims'.

Happyilylost · 23-05-2018 10:17PM

evolving_doors wrote:

No more information has been forthcoming in this thread or any other news source (open to correction) to attempt to deliver a 'full view'. Only thing i see is speculation on the supposed ulterior motives of the journalist and parents, arguing to the absurd and people bemoaning the loss of a season for kids, who are apparently 'the real victims'.

Just to add the kids are back hurling.

danganabu · 23-05-2018 10:20PM

Happyilylost wrote: »

Just to add the kids are back hurling.

The two boys must be playing minor by now are they

evolving_doors · 23-05-2018 11:35PM

Happyilylost wrote: »

Just to add the kids are back hurling.

How do you mean 'the kids'. All the kids in the club?

blanch152 · 23-05-2018 11:58PM

BrianBoru00 wrote: »

Sweet Jesus

That is the exact type of reaction to this incident that is giving the GAA a bad name.

You don't deserve to know whether the kids or their parents were right or wrong, had good motives or bad. All you deserve to know is that the club handle child complaint issues in a confidential and fair manner.

They don't.

Billgirlylegs · 24-05-2018 12:19AM

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

No I mean the gaa in general, as in those everyday people who are involved in the game itself. His take on jim gavin's comments on mayo last year - I felt he made a lot of it for what it actually was. He was a bit clumsy in his words maybe but not a whole lot else. It's not an easy thing to speak in font of reporters willing you to word something poorly and trying to catch you out. As for him not having a quip to reply, maybe the guy just isn't that witty, it isn't a crime.

In this instance I feel he has crafted a kind of gaa caricature for the nation to take aim at.Yet many with genuine knowledge of the thing are saying that this is in fact not as straightforward as it appears and his reporting is not in fact a fair reflection.
I cant help but feel his approach to reporting on gaa stories might have one eye on the actual game itself. The only time Ive heard him speak positively about gaa people, was about the mayo team, but that was part of his stick for beating gavin with. I'm curious if he has ever had a good word to say about the sport without it being part of some other point where he was looking to knock someone else...

I don’t get any criticism of “de gah” in the article.
What information in the article has been disproved, in your opinion?

Paper doesn’t refuse ink, so the writer wrote a story about specific events that did take place. He did not make it up, and does not seem to have exaggerated.
It is of interest to parents, because the club tried to ignore the issue and then conspired against two boys and their parents.
Finally, the journalist didn’t suspend the club, GAA HQ did.
The story was written as a result of the suspension

Happyilylost · 24-05-2018 06:36AM

evolving_doors wrote:

How do you mean 'the kids'. All the kids in the club?

Yes all the kids.

MayoAreMagic · 24-05-2018 11:38AM

evolving_doors wrote: »

No more information has been forthcoming in this thread or any other news source (open to correction) to attempt to deliver a 'full view'. Only thing i see is speculation on the supposed ulterior motives of the journalist and parents, arguing to the absurd and people bemoaning the loss of a season for kids, who are apparently 'the real victims'.

Well i dont know about that. There are people on this thread that have knowledge of the case and have offered other details. For example, we have been told that there is more to the case. That it wasnt as one sided as kimmage has described etc.

MayoAreMagic · 24-05-2018 12:08PM

blanch152 wrote: »

No, it isn't important to try to deliver a full view of what exactly is the story. The only part of the story that is relevant is the handling of the complaint by the club. Who was right or wrong in relation to the various incidents complained of is completely immaterial.

I believe that the GAA has come out of this really really well. There was a dreadful breach of procedure by a club and they have been sanctioned very very heavily. The club has come out very very badly, and I would not send a child to that club as a result.

I dont see how that is the only part that is relevant to discussion. Maybe it is in your opinion for whatever reason, but for most other people many facets of the story warrant discussion. You dont have to discuss them yourself if you dont feel like it, but dictating to others what they can discuss isnt going to fly.

As for the gaa image, well how about the image of gaa club members? He hasnt portrayed any of them in a very good light - kids parents included. They all seem to play up to bad stereotypes to tell a particular story. Id just be conscious of what kimmage might have in mind longterm. Now I accept that could prove to be wrong, but I think it is worth keeping an eye on - he makes money off a crusade and he doesnt really care who he upsets along the way. I find it interesting that so many old team mates etc dislike him to the level they do. Is that because they were all on drugs like he suggests (without actually saying so), or is it because he has painted that stereotype onto all of them to portray a particular story that will further his own career, and it isnt in fact the reality.. Id say a bit of both. I suppose im trying to say that it is worth keeping in mind that kimmage looks out for kimmage.

blanch152 · 24-05-2018 02:21PM

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

Well i dont know about that. There are people on this thread that have knowledge of the case and have offered other details. For example, we have been told that there is more to the case. That it wasnt as one sided as kimmage has described etc.

The people on this thread who are offering more information that is not in the public domain are as guilty of breaching child protection guidelines as the club is. The fact that they are generally trying to damn the children and their parents shows that the mentality in the club doesn't appear to have changed.

The "Valley of the Squinting Windows" approach of those who encourage the extra details is pretty disgusting as well.

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

I dont see how that is the only part that is relevant to discussion. Maybe it is in your opinion for whatever reason, but for most other people many facets of the story warrant discussion. You dont have to discuss them yourself if you dont feel like it, but dictating to others what they can discuss isnt going to fly.

As for the gaa image, well how about the image of gaa club members? He hasnt portrayed any of them in a very good light - kids parents included. They all seem to play up to bad stereotypes to tell a particular story. Id just be conscious of what kimmage might have in mind longterm. Now I accept that could prove to be wrong, but I think it is worth keeping an eye on - he makes money off a crusade and he doesnt really care who he upsets along the way. I find it interesting that so many old team mates etc dislike him to the level they do. Is that because they were all on drugs like he suggests (without actually saying so), or is it because he has painted that stereotype onto all of them to portray a particular story that will further his own career, and it isnt in fact the reality.. Id say a bit of both. I suppose im trying to say that it is worth keeping in mind that kimmage looks out for kimmage.

You are just shooting the messenger rather than dealing with the issue.

MayoAreMagic · 24-05-2018 02:26PM

blanch152 wrote: »

The people on this thread who are offering more information that is not in the public domain are as guilty of breaching child protection guidelines as the club is. The fact that they are generally trying to damn the children and their parents shows that the mentality in the club doesn't appear to have changed.

The "Valley of the Squinting Windows" approach of those who encourage the extra details is pretty disgusting as well.

You are just shooting the messenger rather than dealing with the issue.

1. They are no more guilty of such a breach than paul kimmage is..
2. Who said they were involved with the club?
3. Again, that isnt what shooting the messenger is. Maybe google shooting the messenger before you make the the comment a third time

blanch152 · 25-05-2018 11:02AM

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

1. They are no more guilty of such a breach than paul kimmage is..
2. Who said they were involved with the club?
3. Again, that isnt what shooting the messenger is. Maybe google shooting the messenger before you make the the comment a third time

You don't like hearing bad news about a GAA club and you are blaming the journalist - Paul Kimmage - for having an agenda. As clear an example of shooting the messenger as there is.

BrianBoru00 · 25-05-2018 10:05PM

None of us like hearing bad news about a GAA club, or any other amateur sports club for that matter.

Theres nobody here offering more information than is in the public domain.
Perhaps "public domain" is something else you should google.

The identities of all people involved are well known around Athenry & Galway. Hence they are in the public domain.

Twiceasnice97 · 25-05-2018 10:45PM

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

I dont see how that is the only part that is relevant to discussion. Maybe it is in your opinion for whatever reason, but for most other people many facets of the story warrant discussion. You dont have to discuss them yourself if you dont feel like it, but dictating to others what they can discuss isnt going to fly.

As for the gaa image, well how about the image of gaa club members? He hasnt portrayed any of them in a very good light - kids parents included. They all seem to play up to bad stereotypes to tell a particular story. Id just be conscious of what kimmage might have in mind longterm. Now I accept that could prove to be wrong, but I think it is worth keeping an eye on - he makes money off a crusade and he doesnt really care who he upsets along the way. I find it interesting that so many old team mates etc dislike him to the level they do. Is that because they were all on drugs like he suggests (without actually saying so), or is it because he has painted that stereotype onto all of them to portray a particular story that will further his own career, and it isnt in fact the reality.. Id say a bit of both. I suppose im trying to say that it is worth keeping in mind that kimmage looks out for kimmage.

Are you really posting that?

Seriously , about cycling, you believe that maybe teammates don't like Kimmage because he made up storys about drug taking rather than thinking that they don't like him because they were drugged up to the eyeballs and kimmage told the truth about it.

on the subject at hand the gaa club concerned had their entire juvenile section banned by the gaa.
That is an utterly extraordinary development.
Waffle about whether this whole thing is a row between two big familys in Athenry vying for control of the club requires us to believe that the parents have managed to hoodwink the entire structure of the gaa that their internal political row is in fact a child care issue when it isn't.

I prefer to believe that the entire Gaa structure from the Galway Child welfare officer all the way up to the Gaa central council are not a bunch of absolute morons

citykat · 26-05-2018 10:08AM

Happyilylost wrote: »

evolving_doors wrote:

How do you mean 'the kids'. All the kids in the club?

Yes all the kids.

Are they hosting Feile teams?

MayoAreMagic · 29-05-2018 03:05PM

Twiceasnice97 wrote: »

Are you really posting that?

Seriously , about cycling, you believe that maybe teammates don't like Kimmage because he made up storys about drug taking rather than thinking that they don't like him because they were drugged up to the eyeballs and kimmage told the truth about it.

I believe, after reading his book, interviews with his team mates and indeed actions of team mates, interviews with other cyclists, subsequent articles that Kimmage has written across a wide range of topics as well as discussions he has had on radio etc, that Kimmage is looking out for Kimmage first and foremost, rather than the paragon of virtue looking to deliver the truth to the people that he might like people to think. And while I don't doubt that there was plenty of drug taking, neither do I doubt that Kimmage was above throwing a few innocents to the lions if it meant portraying his story how he wanted to for maximum effect. That isn't to say he named innocent people, but Id suggest he maybe didn't go out of his way to name them as innocent in the knowledge that his conspiracy theory would benefit, regardless of what that might do to their reputation.

That isn't to say that in this case the club official got it right and nobody is saying he wasn't wrong. What I am saying is to take Kimmage's narrative as gospel, I would consider to be quite naïve. I think he chose the details he wanted and chose the ones he didn't want to mention. I think he had an idea of 'this is the story I want to tell', rather than going in and just telling the story.

Stoner · 29-05-2018 10:45PM

MayoAreMagic wrote:

That isn't to say that in this case the club official got it right and nobody is saying he wasn't wrong. What I am saying is to take Kimmage's narrative as gospel, I would consider to be quite naÃ¯ve. I think he chose the details he wanted and chose the ones he didn't want to mention. I think he had an idea of 'this is the story I want to tell', rather than going in and just telling the story.

This is a rare moments on board.ie

I auctually completely agree with MAM here.

It's almost like the time Hulk Hogan and Randy Macho Man Savage shook hands.

They were doped too.

evolving_doors · 29-05-2018 10:50PM

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

I believe, after reading his book, interviews with his team mates and indeed actions of team mates, interviews with other cyclists, subsequent articles that Kimmage has written across a wide range of topics as well as discussions he has had on radio etc, that Kimmage is looking out for Kimmage first and foremost, rather than the paragon of virtue looking to deliver the truth to the people that he might like people to think. And while I don't doubt that there was plenty of drug taking, neither do I doubt that Kimmage was above throwing a few innocents to the lions if it meant portraying his story how he wanted to for maximum effect. That isn't to say he named innocent people, but Id suggest he maybe didn't go out of his way to name them as innocent in the knowledge that his conspiracy theory would benefit, regardless of what that might do to their reputation.

That isn't to say that in this case the club official got it right and nobody is saying he wasn't wrong. What I am saying is to take Kimmage's narrative as gospel, I would consider to be quite naïve. I think he chose the details he wanted and chose the ones he didn't want to mention. I think he had an idea of 'this is the story I want to tell', rather than going in and just telling the story.

What didn't he want to mention?

MayoAreMagic · 29-05-2018 11:17PM

evolving_doors wrote: »

[/b]

What didn't he want to mention?

Well, it is strange to me that he doesn't attempt to speak with the actual u-14 coach in the entire thing. They are kind of a key figure in that their approval can normalise the kids actions, and isolate the club official. While their disapproval turns some of the focus onto the kids parents... They are sort of a neutral third party here, who had access to both sides.
Did he encourage the players to go to the u14 training or did he just go along with it on the night when they arrived? Did he say to come along to the match to view it after their doing the training, or did he tell them to tog out as full blown team members? Could he even have maybe had a word with the club official about them togging out with the team above their grade and asked what was that about? Those details are kinda brushed over.
We are led to believe that he didn't bat an eyelid, by virtue of the fact that he is completely ignored in the article. I have my doubts about that.

Smith614 · 30-05-2018 09:15AM

I heard a 10 yr old tell his manager to F**k off during a blitz in past few weeks. The parents didnt act , i wonder can the club go to Croke Park to get the player removed from tthe club?

Glass fused light · 30-05-2018 11:55AM

Smith614 wrote: »

I heard a 10 yr old tell his manager to F**k off during a blitz in past few weeks. The parents didnt act , i wonder can the club go to Croke Park to get the player removed from tthe club?

The club should have a disiplinary proceedure to deal with offending behaviour irrespective of the source. The guidelines go both ways but have to take account of the disparity between adults and childern. As such the consequences of an action may impact the adult more, but the use of bad language,if one on one, should be disciplined equally across all ages.

In your example the adult is not giving time and effort to be verbally abused and the 10 year old should be made aware of that. If there is a clear process that would result in the player being removed then yes the player should be removed.
eg the manger rebukes the player and issues a waring which is also conveyed to the parent that such behavior is not acceptable and that the consequence of continued misbehaviour would range from a time out to club exclusion. The behaviour continued and upon fair investigation the action was confirmed as a breach of the members obligation to be civil to others and that the appropriate sanction is removal from the club, then the child should be removed.

In this clubs situation the sanction was not for the two complaints, nor for not having a disiplinary process, but for actively interfering with the disiplinary process.

blanch152 · 30-05-2018 04:40PM

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

Well, it is strange to me that he doesn't attempt to speak with the actual u-14 coach in the entire thing. They are kind of a key figure in that their approval can normalise the kids actions, and isolate the club official. While their disapproval turns some of the focus onto the kids parents... They are sort of a neutral third party here, who had access to both sides.
Did he encourage the players to go to the u14 training or did he just go along with it on the night when they arrived? Did he say to come along to the match to view it after their doing the training, or did he tell them to tog out as full blown team members? Could he even have maybe had a word with the club official about them togging out with the team above their grade and asked what was that about? Those details are kinda brushed over.
We are led to believe that he didn't bat an eyelid, by virtue of the fact that he is completely ignored in the article. I have my doubts about that.

How many times do you need to be told that the rights and wrongs of the issue involving the U-14 coach have absolutely nothing to do with the club being suspended.

The club is quite rightly suspended because they couldn't manage to keep a confidential child protection issue confidential. Simple as that. Nothing else is relevant.

clint_silver · 30-05-2018 05:08PM

blanch152 wrote: »

How many times do you need to be told that the rights and wrongs of the issue involving the U-14 coach have absolutely nothing to do with the club being suspended.

The club is quite rightly suspended because they couldn't manage to keep a confidential child protection issue confidential. Simple as that. Nothing else is relevant.

Totally agree. Involved with GAA at underage.

The mentor was badly let down by club and the GAA here by having his name mentioned anywhere outside the clubs 4 walls. All the meetings were beyond unnecessary.

Seen many bad incidents. Seen horror stories of how kids AND parents mis-interpreted things. Gards nearly being called over things that never even happened. Soon as I read the story about mentor said "youll never put a jersey on", youre saying to yourself, that didnt happen like that. Really shouldnt have been alone with kids though, a golden rule. But youre relying on every mentor in the country to use the exact words that every child will interpret the exact right way, every time the mentor talks to them. You can have every welfare course under the sun done. Never gonna get that right. Who works with people where that happens, and we're adults.

Why didnt Kimmage write about the mentor not putting his own kids to bed as he had to stay behind after a game to take down nets and put them away and that was even after he'd asked parents of the team he coaches to help him? Nothing sexy in that is there. Kimmage is no doubt a fine writer but theres an agenda behind this story.
If Kimmage understood mentoring kids he wouldnt have wrote it the way he did. The club shouldnt have spoke to him without asking what his agenda was, and the club should have said you know what damage this will do individual volunteers, volunteers across the sport, across any sport?

MayoAreMagic · 30-05-2018 06:40PM

blanch152 wrote: »

How many times do you need to be told that the rights and wrongs of the issue involving the U-14 coach have absolutely nothing to do with the club being suspended.

The club is quite rightly suspended because they couldn't manage to keep a confidential child protection issue confidential. Simple as that. Nothing else is relevant.

Im not discussing the club being suspended though, and have never said they shouldnt have been suspended. Im discussing kimmage's article. The club werent suspended on the back of the article, so I dont know why you keep bringing up the suspension in response to a post about an article in the paper.

Also, surely the club would be hindered keeping the thing confidential, when the parent of the child involved goes to the national media about the story. Short of kidnapping kimmage, what could they have done in that scenario?

blanch152 · 30-05-2018 09:39PM

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

Im not discussing the club being suspended though, and have never said they shouldnt have been suspended. Im discussing kimmage's article. The club werent suspended on the back of the article, so I dont know why you keep bringing up the suspension in response to a post about an article in the paper.

Also, surely the club would be hindered keeping the thing confidential, when the parent of the child involved goes to the national media about the story. Short of kidnapping kimmage, what could they have done in that scenario?

Oh my God, the club had already called a number of public meetings about a child protection issue, long before Kimmage wrote his article, he couldn't have written it until the club put the allegations into the public arena. If you cannot see how wrong the club was, and how right Kimmage was to expose the murky dealings of the club, well, I don't know what to say.

Kimmage was lambasted by the cycling elite for exposing the cheats. Seems the defences are up from the GAA elites.

evolving_doors · 30-05-2018 09:53PM

clint_silver wrote: »

Totally agree. Involved with GAA at underage.

The mentor was badly let down by club and the GAA here by having his name mentioned anywhere outside the clubs 4 walls. All the meetings were beyond unnecessary.

Seen many bad incidents. Seen horror stories of how kids AND parents mis-interpreted things. Gards nearly being called over things that never even happened. Soon as I read the story about mentor said "youll never put a jersey on", youre saying to yourself, that didnt happen like that. Really shouldnt have been alone with kids though, a golden rule. But youre relying on every mentor in the country to use the exact words that every child will interpret the exact right way, every time the mentor talks to them. You can have every welfare course under the sun done. Never gonna get that right. Who works with people where that happens, and we're adults.

Why didnt Kimmage write about the mentor not putting his own kids to bed as he had to stay behind after a game to take down nets and put them away and that was even after he'd asked parents of the team he coaches to help him? Nothing sexy in that is there. Kimmage is no doubt a fine writer but theres an agenda behind this story.

The story isn't about the kind hearted nature of the wonderful volunteers in the GAA! It's about a child protection issue and how members of a club attempted to circle the wagons and single out a family and kids.

clint_silver wrote: »

If Kimmage understood mentoring kids he wouldnt have wrote it the way he did. The club shouldnt have spoke to him without asking what his agenda was, and the club should have said you know what damage this will do individual volunteers, volunteers across the sport, across any sport?

So protect the volunteers at what cost?
Anyhow has the club all turned to lava? Someone said a few posts ago that the kids are back in action now, the world didn't end. They'll think twice about swearing at kids and being alone with them in a room, and turning a community against parents. That's a good thing.

clint_silver · 30-05-2018 10:13PM

blanch152 wrote: »

Oh my God, the club had already called a number of public meetings about a child protection issue, long before Kimmage wrote his article, he couldn't have written it until the club put the allegations into the public arena. If you cannot see how wrong the club was, and how right Kimmage was to expose the murky dealings of the club, well, I don't know what to say.

Kimmage was lambasted by the cycling elite for exposing the cheats. Seems the defences are up from the GAA elites.

murky dealings of the club is a bit extreme. theyre volunteers.

Theres methods from bottom to the top for dealing with things.

If its a child welfare issue, the mentor on the team is first port of call or another mentor if thats where the issue is. Then, for a club of that size they should have one, the child welfare officer for that code..
Then theres an executive club board with a club welfare officer.
An executive county board with a child officer if needs be.
A gaa exec council with a welfare officer (gearoid in this case).

If theres conflict with any point you go one higher, if you go straight to the top like what happened here, they will refer you back down the chain and rightly so.

As for a coach swearing at kids, do me a favor, was it an isolated incident, was he constantly swearing at them?
did the kids have a problem with it or just the parents?
did the coach go on severall courses paid for out of his own money, apply proper RAMP warmup principles to the team, use latest games model for coaching, maximize the kids potential whilst navigating the minefield of "child welfare" where an isolated use of a swear word is thrown into nearly the same bracket as a potential grooming case?

but theres another coach in another club, he watched a couple of gaa games when he was growing up, he throws his name in the ring, he's now a coach too. not interested in doing a course, doesnt have time, kids are going backwards under him, but oh yeah, he's good, he doesnt use swear words. Kids give up when theyre 14-15, cos theyre losing every week. they know theyre not getting better. But that doesnt matter because the coach doesnt use swear words.

The point is, you pick and choose what you want to highlight. what is and isnt an actual problem. The first fella needs a word in the ear, and/or the welfare course if he hasnt done it. the second fella needs a lot more.

The story shouldnt have left the 4 walls of the club, county or GAA. Whats printing in a national newspaper going to do? rectify it? make anyone do anything different?

blanch152 · 30-05-2018 11:54PM

clint_silver wrote: »

murky dealings of the club is a bit extreme. theyre volunteers.

Theres methods from bottom to the top for dealing with things.

If its a child welfare issue, the mentor on the team is first port of call or another mentor if thats where the issue is. Then, for a club of that size they should have one, the child welfare officer for that code..
Then theres an executive club board with a club welfare officer.
An executive county board with a child officer if needs be.
A gaa exec council with a welfare officer (gearoid in this case).

If theres conflict with any point you go one higher, if you go straight to the top like what happened here, they will refer you back down the chain and rightly so.

As for a coach swearing at kids, do me a favor, was it an isolated incident, was he constantly swearing at them?
did the kids have a problem with it or just the parents?
did the coach go on severall courses paid for out of his own money, apply proper RAMP warmup principles to the team, use latest games model for coaching, maximize the kids potential whilst navigating the minefield of "child welfare" where an isolated use of a swear word is thrown into nearly the same bracket as a potential grooming case?

but theres another coach in another club, he watched a couple of gaa games when he was growing up, he throws his name in the ring, he's now a coach too. not interested in doing a course, doesnt have time, kids are going backwards under him, but oh yeah, he's good, he doesnt use swear words. Kids give up when theyre 14-15, cos theyre losing every week. they know theyre not getting better. But that doesnt matter because the coach doesnt use swear words.

The point is, you pick and choose what you want to highlight. what is and isnt an actual problem. The first fella needs a word in the ear, and/or the welfare course if he hasnt done it. the second fella needs a lot more.

The story shouldnt have left the 4 walls of the club, county or GAA. Whats printing in a national newspaper going to do? rectify it? make anyone do anything different?

A fundamental point of disagreement with you is that the main issue isn't any of the above - you even make some reasonable points - but that the main issue is confidentiality of child protection. The club broke this, the club should suffer.

clint_silver · 31-05-2018 12:13AM

blanch152 wrote: »

A fundamental point of disagreement with you is that the main issue isn't any of the above - you even make some reasonable points - but that the main issue is confidentiality of child protection. The club broke this, the club should suffer.

but thats up to the GAA club, then the county and then the central council to decide what punishment there should be and it should be left there. Whats printing names in a national newspaper going to do other than put anyone off ever volunteering at all.

with all the current regulations, you cant cross a white line or fill a water bottle without a welfare course or your foundation course done. Thats law since last month. If you asked a mam on the sideline who was helping a girl put a jersey on has she got a welfare course done, if she says no, you can call the gards on her and the club. That's how serious its got (lady from Tusla confirmed that in a workshop I was at).

And now if you use a swear word, intentionally OR otherwise, your name could be on the front of a national newspaper? Its just not right.

Why would anyone be a mentor?

Under-age training misconduct

Comments