Club Championships 2022/23

He could be a perfectly nice person personally. But that is a description of his work life. It's even there in the words used. 'Profession'al troll.

I like the way you distort "work" into "work-life" hoping no one will notice to try to say the word "troll" refers to a body of work and not the person. You try hard to be fair to you. Doesn't stop it being gibberish though.

The idea that Glen made an absolute dog's dinner of themselves is irrefutable and it's nice to see someone look past the "plucky outsiders" nonsense and call it what it is. Take your beating and not go looking for some last minute technicality to do what you failed, despite a sizeable lead, to do on the pitch. Or else have the guts to see it through.

He 'made it up' in other words.

If you cannot work out that the article is his interpretation of what is observable, you really shouldn't be reading journalism.

True Gaels 🤭

If you genuinely can't see a difference between someone writing a transparent opinion piece and the prejudicial clickbait article you unsurprisingly chose to believe where the writer attributed a made up position that Crokes wouldn't fulfill a replay if that was the ultimate outcome of the investigation process to an unnamed "source" then that's just a reflection of your own anti Crokes bias which in fairness is visible for all to see and is quite sad really.

I have no intention of reading previous pieces to decide whether I believe you or not. Nor do I have time to look up some reference to Joe Brolly and react to it just to be consistent.

My point stands - if you had a rational argument against Conlon's piece you could have given it. Instead you called him "a professional troll". That's fine if you think that but it's not an argument. Shooting the messenger is the oldest and most transparent trick in the book.

Both 'Crokes refusing to replay' and 'Glen knowing that Crokes would ultimately refuse to replay' are positions made up by you. Absolute confection. Total fabrication. Products of your imagination. Or maybe plucked from the previously maligned "unnamed sources"? You write this and at the same time have the nerve to take issue with an opinion piece because your man "made it up"? You are quite the peddler of fiction yourself.

And you have made it up that the journalist was not quoting a source. Simply put, you have no idea.

You 'chose' not to believe the story as is your right. I can also chose to believe it, it tallies with their behaviour.

The best team in Ireland won with 17 players on the field illegally.

I used 17 because if I said 16, somebody would correct me.

I would take @FrancieBradys opinion over Pat Spillanes opinion all day long. In fact, I would take anybodys opinion over Pat Spillanes. Spillane is the greatest spoofer of all time. And in this case, he obviously hasn't taken the time to review the rules of the game. As it has clearly been demonstrated here over and over again that Kilmacud Crokes broke the rules. It is not even a matter of "did they?".

and no other team broke a rule ? its like a broken record ; it was the referee who made the biggest mistake not re-taking 45 - anything on that

That's awful muck. Glen making a dogs dinner of themselves???? That is an embarrassing statement. Glen are the only party to come of this with any integrity. They obviously decided that they would be the bigger men in this, when they saw that Kilmacud were acting the maggot and were going to bully their way by appealing something that they had clearly breached the rules.

Before the process had taken its course, Glen walked away. Their contention that the conditions do not exist for a replay to be contested is jumping the gun. Glen were going to be no worse off if they couldn't field a team on the day. If Crokes failed to field a team, it could have opened the way for further action possibly awarding the title to Glen. Glen should have seen the process through, or decided not to raise an objection in the first place.

“Watty Graham’s GAC, Glen lodged an objection to the result of the All-Ireland club final because we believed that grounds existed for a replay to be held if Rule 6.44 had been broken.

“However, the club does not now believe that the opportunity is there for a replay to go ahead.

“Due to the ongoing proceedings, we as a club now do not believe the conditions exist for a replay to be contested.

“Consequently, Watty Graham’s, Glen would like to withdraw from this process.

“The club added that the sense of pride and respect they have for their team and management would endure.

“They have treated us to countless moments of joy, which until recently, we didn’t even know were possible.

“Watty Graham’s GAC would like to thank our members for all the support they have given to our players, management and committee."

I don't know what wider implications were apparent? They only had to wait for a few days to let the process continue, and put the onus on the GAA and Crokes to decide the next steps. They were just as much playing a guessing game as the rest of us whether Crokes would have accepted a replay. They did nothing to further the interests of the game by not letting the process take its course.

Before they objected they tried to take the "moral high ground" by looking for clarification. Which was a nonsense when they could read the rules and form whatever opinion the same as anyone else.