Groin-grabbingly horrible!

SandyRamp · 26-10-2012 01:07PM

i think there is more to this case than the media reported. I have heard from a number of people that the lad in question had recently had surgery on his scrotum and still had stitches in place. The other lad tore open the stitches when he tackled him.

davet82 · 26-10-2012 01:13PM

he accidently did this while trying to pull his jersey? what aload of shíte...

i think the average scumbag on the street has more of ethics than to rip a mans testicals off, as for the people jeering in
the court it just adds insult to injury...

You can see why people get tempted into taking the law into their own hands, i dont condone street justice but i definately can understand why people get driven to it

davet82 · 26-10-2012 01:17PM

SandyRamp wrote: »

i think there is more to this case than the media reported. I have heard from a number of people that the lad in question had recently had surgery on his scrotum and still had stitches in place. The other lad tore open the stitches when he tackled him.

that would change things, it would be a very bad article if that is the case...

although it seems odd that he would make that gesture about squeezing his testicals, sounds like the culprit may have been aware of his stiches if that proves to be the case...

Intensive Care Bear · 26-10-2012 01:22PM

That referee should get the sac.

SandyRamp · 26-10-2012 01:22PM

davet82 wrote: »

that would change things, it would be a very bad article if that is the case...

although it seems odd that he would make that gesture about squeezing his testicals, sounds like the culprit may have been aware of his stiches if that proves to be the case...

I don't know about that as I wasn't there, I suppose it is possible. I do know from a few people who were at that match and supporting the injured players team that they were under the impression also that it was just a bad tackle gone very wrong. Understandably the victim's father was furious, but I am not sure the case should have gone as far as it did tbh.

M cebee · 26-10-2012 01:24PM

SandyRamp wrote: »

I don't know about that as I wasn't there, I suppose it is possible. I do know from a few people who were at that match and supporting the injured players team that they were under the impression also that it was just a bad tackle gone very wrong. Understandably the victim's father was furious, but I am not sure the case should have gone as far as it did tbh.

why?

it appears to be deliberate from the newspaper report

ButtersSuki · 26-10-2012 01:28PM

ballsymchugh wrote: »

assault on a sports field is not exclusive to the GAA.

i'll never understand why some people think that what happens in sport shouldn't have consequences off it. assault is assault. you shouldn't be able to hide behind the excuse of tackling or whatever to justify it.

I didn't say that assaults like this don't occur in other sports; we all know that they do - it just seems like the frequency of these types of incidents seems all the more common to GAA. However, were this to occur in most other sports the perpetrator would receive a lengthy ban - and I have yet to read of any ban imposed on this particular individual. It's not exaggerating either to say there would be more co-operation in investigating an incident like this were it to occur outside of the GAA from all parties - players, officials and supporters.

What disturbs me most however is the conspiracy of collective silence from the witnesses. They are almost as cowardly in their refusal to simply tell the truth about what they witnessed as the perpetrator. It's this tribal/protect our own at all costs/the whole world is against us mentality that sickens me. It's "protect the image of the GAA at all costs" in their minds - yet they don't realise that it's the damage caused by not confronting and dealing severely with these incidents that ultimately does more reputational damage than the incidents themselves.

gobnaitolunacy · 26-10-2012 01:36PM

1210m5g wrote: »

That referee should get the sac.

Not funny, the guy was practically castrated.

kincsem · 26-10-2012 01:39PM

I think the judge should have advised the jury that the laws of Ireland do apply on a GAA pitch.

ButtersSuki · 26-10-2012 01:46PM

SandyRamp wrote: »

i think there is more to this case than the media reported. I have heard from a number of people that the lad in question had recently had surgery on his scrotum and still had stitches in place. The other lad tore open the stitches when he tackled him.

Sorry, not sure of the logic here....

Are you saying it's ok to grab and squeeze (which the perpetrator himself admitted) an opponent's testicles during a match if they don't have stitches on their scrotum at the time, but not if they do?

bladespin · 26-10-2012 01:54PM

SandyRamp wrote: »

i think there is more to this case than the media reported. I have heard from a number of people that the lad in question had recently had surgery on his scrotum and still had stitches in place. The other lad tore open the stitches when he tackled him.

Haven't heard that before, where did you hear it?

Also, wasn't this an off the ball incident? How can you tackle someone when they're not in play?

Martyn1989 · 26-10-2012 02:29PM

In the photos in the link it appears to show a defendent walking with his head held high and a plaintiff with his head hanging. Speaks volumes about the effect the incident has had on the lads involved.

Furious_George · 26-10-2012 02:55PM

Fukcing disgusting result by the jury. I don't watch Gaelic football any more because its just full of thugs laying into each other, and that's at inter-county level, at local level its even worse. At least hurling is too fast and skilful a game to have too much of this (although it does occur as in many sports).
Justice system in this country is broken.

SandyRamp · 26-10-2012 02:58PM

bladespin wrote: »

Haven't heard that before, where did you hear it?

Also, wasn't this an off the ball incident? How can you tackle someone when they're not in play?

I heard from people who were at that match. I wasn't at it so I don't know exactly what happened, it is what I was told.

SandyRamp · 26-10-2012 03:00PM

M cebee wrote: »

why?

it appears to be deliberate from the newspaper report

Yes, the tackle was supposedly deliberate but I don't think ripping the lads nuts off was!

The newspaper report is missing loads of details, the defendant got a lifetime ban from GAA and I think other sports too.

Il Trap · 26-10-2012 03:03PM

SandyRamp wrote: »

Yes, the tackle was supposedly deliberate but I don't think ripping the lads nuts off was!

The newspaper report is missing loads of details, the defendant got a lifetime ban from GAA and I think other sports too.

How is the plaintiff, do you know? Is he (will he ever be!) back to normal again?

F*ck the defendant, the cretin.

SandyRamp · 26-10-2012 03:07PM

Il Trap wrote: »

How is the plaintiff, do you know? Is he (will he ever be!) back to normal again?

F*ck the defendant, the cretin.

I think everything is hunky dory again, last I heard!

MaxSteele · 26-10-2012 03:08PM

Shower of f*cking inbreds, the group who applauded the verdict.

How about someone goes up to the little after party they're probably having and start ripping some tits off the women ?

davet82 · 26-10-2012 03:12PM

SandyRamp wrote: »

Yes, the tackle was supposedly deliberate but I don't think ripping the lads nuts off was!

The newspaper report is missing loads of details, the defendant got a lifetime ban from GAA and I think other sports too.

I think the ban would be a greater indication of his guilt i'd imagine?

As for not meaning it, how many times have we heard that as a line of defence, not good enough imo

It was a strangley cruel and shockingly callous thing to do to somebody.

SandyRamp · 26-10-2012 03:14PM

davet82 wrote: »

I think the ban would be a greater indication of his guilt i'd imagine?

As for not meaning it, how many times have we heard that as a line of defence, not good enough imo

It was a strangley cruel and shockingly callous thing to do to somebody.

I wonder if the ban will be lifted now that he was found not guilty?

shopaholic01 · 26-10-2012 03:14PM

SandyRamp wrote: »

i think there is more to this case than the media reported. I have heard from a number of people that the lad in question had recently had surgery on his scrotum and still had stitches in place. The other lad tore open the stitches when he tackled him.

Would a player be allowed to play with stitches, especially in his scrotum?

SandyRamp · 26-10-2012 03:17PM

shopaholic01 wrote: »

Would a player be allowed to play with stitches, especially in his scrotum?

I don't think he was meant to be playing, as far as I can recall there was huge controversy over it at the time!

davet82 · 26-10-2012 03:18PM

SandyRamp wrote: »

I wonder if the ban will be lifted now that he was found not guilty?

well that would be the 'right' thing to do i suppose

tin79 · 26-10-2012 03:23PM

gobnaitolunacy wrote: »

Not funny, the guy was practically castrated.

No he wasnt - he had his scrotum torn. Your statment above is like comparing scalping to decapitation.

Also from the articles it would appear to be the word of the defendant vs the word of the plaintiff.

There doesnt seem to be any evidence at all except that the guys scrotum was torn. No reliable witness, no CCTV, no evidence of intent etc - now thats a sad refelction on the GAA mentality (the lack of willing witnesses) but with no evidence there is weak ground for a criminal conviction. Even more so if it turns out he had stitches as mentioned above.

If the defendant was on the ground and tried to pull the injured persons shorts to hold him back and had long fingernails I would think its possible to tear the scrotum - its only a loose bag of skin. So there is enough doubt there to clear him IMO.

From the article I think its difficult to really get a clear idea of the truth.

Still dont let that deter a good old AH cyber lynch mob from going off one on based on their own knee jerk reactions or opions on GAA thuggery (personlly I hate GAA). Do you all buy the Daily Mail by any chance?

It wasn't me! · 26-10-2012 03:46PM

bladespin wrote: »

Also, wasn't this an off the ball incident?

Interesting choice of phrasing!

davet82 · 26-10-2012 04:07PM

SandyRamp wrote: »

I don't think he was meant to be playing, as far as I can recall there was huge controversy over it at the time!

so it was common knowledge that this guy shouldn't have been playing before the match?

i've seen this on a number of websites including rte and they say the lad required stiches because of the injury recieved not that an injury was aggravated, i get the feeling you maybe have been misinformed?

Mont · 26-10-2012 04:31PM

Another great example of our great justice-system. Well done judge

davet82 · 26-10-2012 04:35PM

Mont wrote: »

Another great example of our great justice-system. Well done judge

nothing the judge could do if he was found innocent tbf

SandyRamp · 26-10-2012 04:36PM

davet82 wrote: »

so it was common knowledge that this guy shouldn't have been playing before the match?

i've seen this on a number of websites including rte and they say the lad required stiches because of the injury recieved not that an injury was aggravated, i get the feeling you maybe have been misinformed?

I don't think so, the initial story I heard the day of the match was that his stitches had burst because of a tackle, and this was from people who were there and knew him. It must have been common enough knowledge. As well as this the controversy afterwards was due to the fact that he shouldn't have been playing in the first place.

Odelay · 26-10-2012 10:29PM

SandyRamp wrote: »

Ok I am going to throw this out there, only my immediate family and boyfriend know about this as I am afraid of being labelled a nutjob if I tell anyone about what I seen!

About a year ago I was driving home from a party, it was late enough, after midnight probably, and my mum and brother were in the car with me. It was a really narrow, country road, no street lights or anything.

Anyway, I came around a bend in the road, and my headlights reflected off a pair of eyes in the middle of the road, a good bit ahead of me. I thought to myself it was a cat or a fox or something, but it struck me that they eyes were about 3-4 feet off the ground, and were a LOT bigger than those of a cat or fox. Also, they reflected differently, I can't quite describe it but they were a cloudy white colour, and huge!

As I got a bit closer, I noticed the body of the creature. It was covered in fur, and was walking, upright, into the ditch, all the time with its head turned towards us and eyes fixed on the car.

What freaked me out most was the fact that even though I was driving towards it, it walked so slowly into the ditch, staring us out of it. The only way I could describe the body was monkey-like, though it stood straight up as it walked.

If my mam and brother hadn't seen it, I would have really doubted myself, but they saw the exact same thing as me. It scared me so much that I couldn't even speak about it for months afterwards, I still get shivers dowm my spine even now thinking about it!

I'm just not quite sure that you're the most reliable source of information. Something niggles me a bit.....

Groin-grabbingly horrible!

Comments