windy shepard henderson wrote: there is no doubt connor mcgrath took us out of the fire as none of the starting half forward line had great days , the likes of podge , tony , and galvin all had below par days , changes between cunningham or duck for duggen should have happened but didnt as all 3 didnt enjoy there afternoon
buck65 wrote: » Whatever about Shanahan's free being soft ,Tots free at the end of regular time was very soft - Kelly realistically was lucky not to be sent off, he does have a rash edge to his game when frustrated. All in all the ref was ok, disappointed that he wouldn't keep up with the game to allow a fast puck out.
Davys Fits wrote: » Yes this is a free. Where in the rule book does it say this is a tackle? The beauty of hurling over football is it has a defined tackle ie hooking and blocking. If you keep 2 hands on the hurl then yo wont give away a free.
eddie1986 wrote: » Absolutely ridiculous to think you can keep your two hands on the hurley and tackle effectively. If you stick your hurley out to stop a man coming through (as you would with your arm), is that then acceptable?
Davys Fits wrote: » Rather than asking another question can you answer the original question. Where in the rule book does it say you can put your arms out to stop somebody moving forward?
keeponhurling wrote: » I remember last time Clare played Waterford in a replayed final. Any chance we could get Ger Loughnane as special guest pre-match motivational speaker ??
buck65 wrote: » Clare played one of their best games of hurling that day once the mud settled after the frantic opening. I remember Jamesie offering his hand to Brian Greene who broke Jamesie's hurley instead. Colin Lynch completeley lost in and struck Tony Browne about 4 times across the back whilst Lohan and Michael White went wrestling and got sent off. Waterford completely tried to change the narrative by lodging a complaint against Clare after being hammered and bullied off the field when their own bullying tactics failed.
blue note wrote: » I was a young lad at that match and it was my first season going to matches. Being honest I disliked Clare for years after that match. There was a bit of it on both sides, but far more from clare in fairness. Ye really should have had a couple more sent off in the match and I was sour that a team won like that. It just didn't seem fair to me. It probably ruined your season, but I don't see how you can complain about any of it. The bannings were thoroughly deserved. I still think it was a great clare team, but that season you let yourselves down. I've gotten over it now though and am a big fan of the current clare team. Last week I found myself complimenting the clare players after half their scores because they're just lovely hurlers. Hopefully this weekends match will be a cracker!
buck65 wrote: » No complaints about the sending offs and bannings here, both teams went at it and both were culpible. Lodging a complaint was the part that was a bit rich. Late 90s Clare were not a team to be bullied. I have no ill will against Waterford now but back then I hated them and this was reinforced by the shirt kissing nonsense of Mullane and Eoin Kelly in the following years. The current team and management seem far removed from that crap. It's no secret that the players had far too much say down there and evicted managers that didn't suit them - what did they win after , a few Munster titles? Waterford need to row in behind their current crop and go all the way. They're good enough.
blue note wrote: » In hindsight I have no problem with the complaint. Both teams weren't at it to the same degree and the bannings reflected that. You talk about bullying and it's exactly what Clare did to Waterford in that replay. Waterford were shook from it and played like it. But it wasn't legal or fair bullying and Clare deserved their punishment. It probably cost them the all Ireland that year too. I also had no problem with the shirt kissing, utterly harmless stuff and I can't get my head around how annoyed other counties seemed to be by it.
Clareman wrote: » Major complaints about the banning for Colin Lynch here, he was banned with absolutely 0 evidence against him except testimony from someone in the crowd.
mountgomery burns wrote: » Given he hit all three midfielders before a ball was thrown in I think to be honest the ban was merited.
Clareman wrote: » That wasn't what he was banned for though
mountgomery burns wrote: » Well we'll say justice was done in the end and move on, 18 years later.
letowski wrote: » Same team as last week as per Clare fm twitter machine. It dissapointing that McInerney and Ryan injuries havn't cleared up yet, has anyone any update? Conlons injury gets alot of attention, but those two players would be a huge help. Especially McInerney, its easily forgotten that he was agruably our best player this year til injury, he was dominant v Limerick and his atheletism would be taylor made for a game like Waterford. Overall we need a big improvement from the last day, Waterford aren't likely to be as wasteful. I think we will see an improvement but it mightened be enough. Hopefully Duggan goes better inside, that would give us a good platform to attck if he can win some ball close to goal.
Clareman wrote: » Never, what happened to Clare in 98 was disgrace and I'll never move on from it
