Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

"Trigger" McAteer getting decked by Stephen Cluxton at charity soccer game in Santry

1…45679

Comments

  • #242
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    bubbleking wrote: »
    dont know anything about Lusk or Kerry but the rest of your post is nonsense and shows a real ignorance of the actual issues. Are you even thinking before you type or just mashing the keyboard?

    What actual issue?

    People involved in football have had to deal with all manner of nastiness from the Gah over the years, from the ban, to broken glass on pitches right the way through to recent court cases and other land grab efforts.

    When some of us push back, you get all defensive! Its unreal. Only in Ireland would the Gah trying to steal Shamrock Rovers stadium see Rovers fans told they are being 'unreasonable' for not exactly loving the Gah back! Only one sports body in Ireland has a tradition of apartheit and its not football...


  • #243
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    starbelgrade wrote: »
    The sooner the better the "us & them" attitude that remains with a small segment of supporters, players & organisers of both GAA & football is banished for good, the better it will be for everyone.

    There's no rhyme or reason behind it.

    Too simplistic. The Gah are still involved in all manner of nasty tricks to 'get at' football.

    The idea that grassroots football folk have to guard their criticism for fear of offending these bigots is unfair.

    If they Gah want to steal our stadia, they can deal with a bit of a backlash


  • #244
    bubbleking
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,143 ✭✭✭bubbleking


    stovelid wrote: »
    You know more about the Rovers/Thomas Davis court case than a member(s) of one of the clubs involved?

    I know that the GAA would not demand the use of the Aviva.

    How much do Rovers pay for the rent of Tallaght stadium?


  • #245
    bubbleking
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,143 ✭✭✭bubbleking


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    Too simplistic. The Gah are still involved in all manner of nasty tricks to 'get at' football.

    The idea that grassroots football folk have to guard their criticism for fear of offending these bigots is unfair.

    If they Gah want to steal our stadia, they can deal with a bit of a backlash

    to be fair mate apart from the Aviva - which is the national stadium and the Tallaght stadium which is too small anyway what other stadia do the LOI have that the GAA would want?

    they already have their own bigger, argueably better ones in each county


  • #246
    stovelid
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,252 ✭✭✭✭stovelid


    bubbleking wrote: »
    How much do Rovers pay for the rent of Tallaght stadium?

    Quite a high rent, believe it or not.

    It's certainly not free as commonly misconstrued in here.


  • Advertisement
  • #247
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    bubbleking wrote: »
    I know that the GAA would not demand the use of the Aviva.

    Even though they did?
    bubbleking wrote: »
    How much do Rovers pay for the rent of Tallaght stadium?

    None of your business.... But its 6 figures.


  • #248
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    bubbleking wrote: »
    to be fair mate apart from the Aviva - which is the national stadium and the Tallaght stadium which is too small anyway what other stadia do the LOI have that the GAA would want?

    they already have their own bigger, argueably better ones in each county

    So ask yourself WHY they spend millions trying to co-opt them?

    As you say, Tallaght would not be used by the Gah. Yet they went to the High Court to have it rebuilt for them anyway. I think you can join those dots yourself.


  • #249
    Coillte_Bhoy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,941 ✭✭✭Coillte_Bhoy


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

    If they Gah want to steal our stadia, they can deal with a bit of a backlash

    Steal your stadia??? Talk about being over dramatic. Apart from Tallaght, what other stadium are you on about and when and under what circumstances did they demand the aviva?


  • #250
    K-9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,313 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    I made no such claim. I am reporting what experiences I have had, as both a Gah player and LoI fan and football coach.




    But its still the rule. Have you put a motion forward to abolish it?



    Did you speak out against your clubs support? You can't champion the Gah's internal democracy then distance yourself from their bad decisions you had a say in.



    Spare me the amateur psychology. I have explained the problems I have with the Gah and their sycophants.

    One thing you cannot deny. As a sport, your lot do not do introspection and self criticism.

    Has one Gah administrator ever been fired?

    Do you take this black and white attitude to everything or just the Gah?

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • #251
    bubbleking
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,143 ✭✭✭bubbleking


    Rovers pay 104k a year. Fair enough I dunno why the GAA is bothering with it as in the grand scheme of things its really a worthless endevour.


  • Advertisement
  • #252
    bruschi
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 4,149 Mod ✭✭✭✭bruschi


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    I made no such claim. I am reporting what experiences I have had, as both a Gah player and LoI fan and football coach.




    But its still the rule. Have you put a motion forward to abolish it?



    Did you speak out against your clubs support? You can't champion the Gah's internal democracy then distance yourself from their bad decisions you had a say in.



    Spare me the amateur psychology. I have explained the problems I have with the Gah and their sycophants.

    One thing you cannot deny. As a sport, your lot do not do introspection and self criticism.

    Has one Gah administrator ever been fired?

    I dont think you even see the irony in your posts, do you? And miss the most blatant arguments of others. GAA and soccer work well in the vast majority of this country, but yet you think the GAA are the ones out to get you, whilst still abusing people who are members of said organisation and calling them bigots? We have moved on, and work well together, why cant you?

    I'll give you the respect of answering the questions you posed,
    1. yes, I did put forward the motion in my club. but it wasnt really voted on and they said it was probably something best left at national level. As I said, if someone in a club doesnt get it started, then who will. But I think the club arent exactly the most outgoing one and are content to plod along and keept things ticking over.

    2. you seem to have some sort of idea that clubs all over the country were in support of Thomas Davis? or that there was some sort of collusion going on within the GAA? What happened with them was to do with that club, and retrospectivley Dublin GAA of which I am not a member. Did you protest about the serie A scandal and put forward your clubs disgust at Milan, Juve and Fiorentina? They are part of UEFA, so does that mean you have an input to that? Just because one part of an association does something, doesnt mean that it is the responsiblity of every single part of it.

    3. so, as a sycophant now, (you really do have a lot of insult names to dish out) you say I cant deny there is no self criticism? That has to be one of the worst things I have ever heard. I am from Wexford. If you had any inclination as to how things are in the GAA, you would realise there is nothing but derision and criticism. Our structures have been crap for years, there hasnt been any forward progression and they have been making a mess of things. A lot of clubs (Thomas Davis included) spent thousands and millions on white elephant projects in the boom to try and show how great they were and are now seriously in debt. Instead of investing in training and building to actual needs, they wanted to try showcase developments, which has left clubs in peril now and was completley foolish. As I already said, rule 42 still being in place is killing clubs. They have facilities to accomodate local sports, but arent allowed to use them. That is a ridiculous situation. There are plenty of things that are wrong about the GAA, but the same goes for any sporting organisation.

    I'm not going to come on here and harp on about the FAI and start abusing posters. I like soccer, and play it every sunday morning. I also play GAA, much like all my friends. If things are still going to go back to a ban that ended in the early 70's when most people on here werent even around, then who really is the bigot and backward thinking? people have moved on and co exist now. your personal experiences are obvuiously completley different to mine, but I'm not the one making claims about a whole organisation or resorting to name calling to try prove a point.


  • #253
    Hard Worker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,170 ✭✭✭Hard Worker


    bubbleking wrote: »
    Rovers pay 104k a year. Fair enough I dunno why the GAA is bothering with it as in the grand scheme of things its really a worthless endevour.

    It's quite obvious why they were bothering with it. They didn't want the youth of Tallaght to be subjected to a diet of association football.


  • #254
    dcr22B
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,528 ✭✭✭dcr22B


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    Even though they did?

    Source?


  • #255
    keane2097
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,814 ✭✭✭✭keane2097


    Hard Worker wrote: »
    It's quite obvious why they were bothering with it. They didn't want the youth of Tallaght to be subjected to a diet of association football.

    I wouldn't want them to either - have you seen the type of thuggery soccer icons like Jason McAteer get up to?

    I don't think our young people should be exposed to the sort of violence soccer types routinely engage in, the sport should be banned.


  • #256
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    bruschi wrote: »
    I dont think you even see the irony in your posts, do you? And miss the most blatant arguments of others. GAA and soccer work well in the vast majority of this country, but yet you think the GAA are the ones out to get you, whilst still abusing people who are members of said organisation and calling them bigots? We have moved on, and work well together, why cant you?

    I'll give you the respect of answering the questions you posed,
    1. yes, I did put forward the motion in my club. but it wasnt really voted on and they said it was probably something best left at national level. As I said, if someone in a club doesnt get it started, then who will. But I think the club arent exactly the most outgoing one and are content to plod along and keept things ticking over.

    2. you seem to have some sort of idea that clubs all over the country were in support of Thomas Davis? or that there was some sort of collusion going on within the GAA? What happened with them was to do with that club, and retrospectivley Dublin GAA of which I am not a member. Did you protest about the serie A scandal and put forward your clubs disgust at Milan, Juve and Fiorentina? They are part of UEFA, so does that mean you have an input to that? Just because one part of an association does something, doesnt mean that it is the responsiblity of every single part of it.

    3. so, as a sycophant now, (you really do have a lot of insult names to dish out) you say I cant deny there is no self criticism? That has to be one of the worst things I have ever heard. I am from Wexford. If you had any inclination as to how things are in the GAA, you would realise there is nothing but derision and criticism. Our structures have been crap for years, there hasnt been any forward progression and they have been making a mess of things. A lot of clubs (Thomas Davis included) spent thousands and millions on white elephant projects in the boom to try and show how great they were and are now seriously in debt. Instead of investing in training and building to actual needs, they wanted to try showcase developments, which has left clubs in peril now and was completley foolish. As I already said, rule 42 still being in place is killing clubs. They have facilities to accomodate local sports, but arent allowed to use them. That is a ridiculous situation. There are plenty of things that are wrong about the GAA, but the same goes for any sporting organisation.

    I'm not going to come on here and harp on about the FAI and start abusing posters. I like soccer, and play it every sunday morning. I also play GAA, much like all my friends. If things are still going to go back to a ban that ended in the early 70's when most people on here werent even around, then who really is the bigot and backward thinking? people have moved on and co exist now. your personal experiences are obvuiously completley different to mine, but I'm not the one making claims about a whole organisation or resorting to name calling to try prove a point.

    You cannot compare the GAA centrally taking a vote to support TD, which was unanimious, and then claiming they didn't support it with an Irish football fan having an input into UEFA coming down on the Italians. It's not like with like.

    I agree however that the majority of people involved in the Gah are decent sporting skins. But there is still an element of rank bigotry from some in positions of power.


  • #257
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    dcr22B wrote: »
    Source?

    Sunday Times, have linked to it before, but they are now charging....


  • #258
    Coillte_Bhoy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,941 ✭✭✭Coillte_Bhoy


    Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »
    Steal your stadia??? Talk about being over dramatic. Apart from Tallaght, what other stadium are you on about and when and under what circumstances did they demand the aviva?

    Well?


  • #259
    Het-Field
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,350 ✭✭✭Het-Field


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    What actual issue?

    People involved in football have had to deal with all manner of nastiness from the Gah over the years, from the ban, to broken glass on pitches right the way through to recent court cases and other land grab efforts.

    When some of us push back, you get all defensive! Its unreal. Only in Ireland would the Gah trying to steal Shamrock Rovers stadium see Rovers fans told they are being 'unreasonable' for not exactly loving the Gah back! Only one sports body in Ireland has a tradition of apartheit and its not football...

    Presumably your use of the quoted word "unreasonable" relates to the legal pleadings, and one of the basis for Davis' decision to judicially review the decision.

    If so, the context in which you use the word is so wrong it is not funny.


  • #260
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »
    Well?

    Article now requires a subsciption, but gist of it was that the Gah President at the time the sod was turned on the Aviva that O'Donoghue privately promised them free access and that the fact they woudn't get access was another affront to the Irish people by the godless athiests in Dublin.


  • #261
    Dempsey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,553 ✭✭✭✭Dempsey


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    Article now requires a subsciption, but gist of it was that the Gah President at the time the sod was turned on the Aviva that O'Donoghue privately promised them free access and that the fact they woudn't get access was another affront to the Irish people by the godless athiests in Dublin.

    And only the Sunday Times ran this article?


  • Advertisement
  • #262
    bruschi
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 4,149 Mod ✭✭✭✭bruschi


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    You cannot compare the GAA centrally taking a vote to support TD, which was unanimious, and then claiming they didn't support it with an Irish football fan having an input into UEFA coming down on the Italians. It's not like with like.

    I agree however that the majority of people involved in the Gah are decent sporting skins. But there is still an element of rank bigotry from some in positions of power.

    the point remains, which you chose to ignore. it was the first thing that came into my head at the time. if a soccer club affiliated with the FAI in Cork started doing something you didnt agree with, would your club protest?

    and the GAA did not take a central vote to support Thomas Davis. you are still peddling this notion that the GAA acted as a union on this to out do Shamrock Rovers. It was a local club, who may or may not (as it is unclear as to what support if any) have had support from their county board. The central council of the GAA stood away from this debate, other than media at the time stoking things up. but this is an argument that has been done to death and is one I think Thomas Davis were wrong on, but you seem to think my club in Wexford should have done something about it?

    As I said, in maybe my bad example, that a club in an organisation doing something does not mean the whole organisation are in support of it. their original stance had 67 clubs supporting them, but they tailed off. the hierarchy in the GAA should have told Thomas Davis to back off, but they went off their own back (and like I said, maybe with the support of their county board).

    your argument lacks any cohesion when in one sentence you state 'decent sporting skins' and then follow that up by again using bigots. it seems a word you like using.

    Bigotry - A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one exhibiting intolerance, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs

    do you not see the irony in persisting in using that phrase? I personally think there are a lot of idiots involved in GAA. They are backward thinking and dont make right decisions and hinder advancement and progression. but this notion of the big bad GAA out to get soccer and try kill it off is ridiculous. and contiuously name calling and abusing members of the organisation hardly makes your arguments sound any better.


  • #263
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    Het-Field wrote: »
    Presumably your use of the quoted word "unreasonable" relates to the legal pleadings, and one of the basis for Davis' decision to judicially review the decision.

    If so, the context in which you use the word is so wrong it is not funny.

    No, it relates to the idea that people who have been bullied for over 100 years have to shrug their shoulders and accept it.


  • #264
    Het-Field
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,350 ✭✭✭Het-Field


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    No, it relates to the idea that people who have been bullied for over 100 years have to shrug their shoulders and accept it.

    Then why did you see fit to quotate it ?

    Who was "bullied for over 100 years" ?


  • #265
    CiaranC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,300 ✭✭✭CiaranC


    starbelgrade wrote: »
    There's no rhyme or reason behind it.
    What do you mean there is "no rhyme or reason behind it". The GAA deliberately dragged SRFC through a two year court case with the expressed intention of having us, the ordinary football fans who were bankrolling the club, run out of cash and go bust before we could get into Tallaght stadium.

    A perfect example of the mentality of the GAA and why they are despised among the real football people of this country.


  • #266
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    Dempsey wrote: »
    And only the Sunday Times ran this article?

    That I saw. Don't read the Gah pages.


  • #267
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    Het-Field wrote: »
    Then why did you see fit to quotate it ?

    Who was "bullied for over 100 years" ?

    Because I did. Don't waste my time with pointless semantics.

    'Foreign' sports by the GAA.


  • #268
    Het-Field
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,350 ✭✭✭Het-Field


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    Because I did. Don't waste my time with pointless semantics.

    No, it would appear you dont understand the basis for the review. Why else would you quotate a word which was a cause of action?

    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    'Foreign' sports by the GAA.


    Grow Up.


  • #269
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    bruschi wrote: »
    the point remains, which you chose to ignore. it was the first thing that came into my head at the time. if a soccer club affiliated with the FAI in Cork started doing something you didnt agree with, would your club protest?

    Yes.
    bruschi wrote: »
    and the GAA did not take a central vote to support Thomas Davis. you are still peddling this notion that the GAA acted as a union on this to out do Shamrock Rovers. It was a local club, who may or may not (as it is unclear as to what support if any) have had support from their county board. The central council of the GAA stood away from this debate, other than media at the time stoking things up. but this is an argument that has been done to death and is one I think Thomas Davis were wrong on, but you seem to think my club in Wexford should have done something about it?

    They did take a central vote at ard comhaoirle level. Just because you are ignorant of it doesn't mean it didn't happen. They had full support both finacially, morally and press statements were made from the DCB.

    Like it or not, your club voted in support of them.
    bruschi wrote: »
    As I said, in maybe my bad example, that a club in an organisation doing something does not mean the whole organisation are in support of it. their original stance had 67 clubs supporting them, but they tailed off. the hierarchy in the GAA should have told Thomas Davis to back off, but they went off their own back (and like I said, maybe with the support of their county board).

    Not true. They had full central backing.
    bruschi wrote: »
    your argument lacks any cohesion when in one sentence you state 'decent sporting skins' and then follow that up by again using bigots. it seems a word you like using.

    Not really. Most people involved in the Gah are there for legitimate reasons and provide a fantastic outlet. Some Gah administrators are sporting fascists whose motivations are darker.
    bruschi wrote: »
    Bigotry - A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one exhibiting intolerance, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs

    Thats elements of the Gah alright.
    bruschi wrote: »
    do you not see the irony in persisting in using that phrase? I personally think there are a lot of idiots involved in GAA. They are backward thinking and dont make right decisions and hinder advancement and progression. but this notion of the big bad GAA out to get soccer and try kill it off is ridiculous. and contiuously name calling and abusing members of the organisation hardly makes your arguments sound any better.

    But its happening. Still. Thats the problem with your logic.


  • #270
    starbelgrade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,739 ✭✭✭✭starbelgrade


    CiaranC wrote: »
    What do you mean there is "no rhyme or reason behind it". The GAA deliberately dragged SRFC through a two year court case with the expressed intention of having us, the ordinary football fans who were bankrolling the club, run out of cash and go bust before we could get into Tallaght stadium.

    A perfect example of the mentality of the GAA and why they are despised among the real football people of this country.

    When I said that there is no rhyme or reason behind it, I was referring to the broader picture. There is no real reason why the two sports simply can't co-exist in this country & get along with each other.

    Obviously, if you take specific examples - as in the Tallaght Stadium case - there will be reasons & motivations behind what the GAA did & subsequent feelings of distrust & hatred from the football community.

    Another poster referred to my take on this as "too simplistic". Perhaps it is simplistic, but then again common sense & cop on were never really rocket science.

    At some stage, it is not unthinkable that a line on all these issues could be drawn in the sand & that the two sporting creeds could reach a mutual understanding. The bickering that exists at the minute does nothing for either side & detracts from the real benefits that both could offer each other.


  • Advertisement
  • #271
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    Het-Field wrote: »
    No, it would appear you dont understand the basis for the review. Why else would you quotate a word which was a cause of action?

    I initimatly understood the review and why it would fail. Don't be so patronising.

    Het-Field wrote: »
    Grow Up.

    So the ban didn't happen? The President of the Republic wasn't expelled from the Gah for going to a football international? Vigilance committees?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement