Mayo GAA Discussion - Part 4

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

He's a intelligent man with good insight into the game and good ideas but too often he's trying to be the Dunphy of GAA punditry, is all about the Joe Show. Im guessing his insight into the whole player revolt/H & C comes form his personal life circumstances?

I would imagine his extra marital arrangement with a female member of back room team from the ill fated H&C era would be the main reason for his personalised attacks on a number of Mayo players.

ProudDUB wrote: »

Yeah and as a barrister, you'd think he'd have the cop on to realize that people are putting 2 and 2 together and coming to their own conclusions on that score. It's hardly a well kept secret at this stage.

You'd be surprised at the number of people that don't know. And people who you would expect to be aware.

Blackjack wrote: »

You'd be surprised at the number of people that don't know. And people who you would expect to be aware.

I think there are a lot of people who would have a healthy disregard for tittle tattle about the personal lives of players, pundits, managers etc etc & would pay it little mind. However, this is clearly having a direct impact on his output as a journalist, so I wouldn't have an ounce of pity for him if it was splashed all across the Sunday World.

Lord knows he's not shy about constantly putting stuff out there that paints himself in a good light, or reinforces his "true Gaelness". The not so salubrious stuff might open up a few eyes & provide some much needed context. Especially in relation to his articles on Mayo.

ProudDUB wrote: »

I think there are a lot of people who would have a healthy disregard for tittle tattle about the personal lives of players, pundits, managers etc etc & would pay it little mind. However, this is clearly having a direct impact on his output as a journalist, so I wouldn't have an ounce of pity for him if it was splashed all across the Sunday World.

Lord knows he's not shy about constantly putting stuff out there that paints himself in a good light, or reinforces his "true Gaelness". The not so salubrious stuff might open up a few eyes & provide some much needed context. Especially in relation to his articles on Mayo.

I agree with everthing you say except the bit in Bold. He's never been that, despite him thinking that he is.

mayo.mick wrote: »

That's a shocking degradation of journalists the world over.

This is the Sunday world we are talking about, for years they only had 3 journalists, Amanda bunker, Paul Williams and William Shakespeare'a reincarnation.... Roy Curtis :rolleyes:

I think Joe brolly is a step up in class to be fair

seligehgit wrote: »

Great win for Tooreen.

Connacht Intermediate Champions.

Fair dues to them. A great result and a great scoreline.

That Kinvara team they beat today are no soft touch.
Hitting 21 points and winning by 5 is some achievement.
From what I hear the two Boland`s were outstanding.

irishgeo wrote: »

Michael Gallagher going to court next w to reinstate him for PRO role. Sounds like the county board don't like change.

Whether you like the rules or not, the rules have to be upheld. Seems to be very clear cut that he wasn't a member when he needed to be.

Personally don't think he has a leg to stand on.

The Supporter wrote: »

The Ballaghaderreen Chairman said in the Mayo News today, that the damage done to Mayo GAA's Name could potentially harm their fund-raising capacity abroad in the future. I totally agree with him. Unless their is a big change in the Officers of Mayo County Board, we may not be able to get funding from abroad next year. For the Mayo Team to be successful next year they need more funding not less. Money has brought success to Limerick Hurlers last year, Tipperary Hurlers this year and A.I.G. has pumped a lot of money into Dublin's success story. I sincerely hope that Michael Gallagher is elected PRO at the next Mayo GAA Convention.

You must be very tired after only having three hours sleep over the last two nights...

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Whether you like the rules or not, the rules have to be upheld. Seems to be very clear cut that he wasn't a member when he needed to be.

Personally don't think he has a leg to stand on.

Couldn't agree more.

It seems preposterous that a potential candidate for the position of PRO of the county board wasn't even a club member at the necessary time.

Rules are rules.IMO he hasn't a leg to stand on.

spakman wrote: »

I think the chairman position is a lot more important than who gets the PRO job.
Michael Gallagher always struck me as a bit wishy washy as a journalist tbh - not sure he'll be a man to implement change, and even if he is, is it possible to do so as PRO?

I think he is kinda milking the current situation a bit, for his own ends. What is there to suggest that he is going to be any better than the current crop that are in there? Going in hard on them now is like shooting fish in a barrel, ahat is he actually going to do? A question Id rather was asked is why wasn't he a member of his club? Surely if he was serious about doing the role, he would have had all this checked from a long way out? It all seems a but opportunistic to me. Even if he actually is this white in shining armour effort, that he portrayed himself as on national radio, what can he actually do while in that role?

If he is suggesting that the rules were bent for the current regime, then surely bending them again will only bring more of the same? My solution would be leave him removed, and then remove anyone else who broke the rules. That would be a proper start to bringing about change.

PressRun wrote: »

On the PRO position, certain county board members haven't covered themselves in glory there. They quoted one rule to Michael Gallagher initially and then went back at a later date and told him that actually they meant he couldn't apply because of a different rule. They don't know themselves what rules they're on about.

The whole thing is a **** show.

Possibly. It could also be that the guy telling him the first time just quoted the wrong rule also though... Im not trying to defend them, but quoting two different rules in two different conversations isnt that big a deal either is it? The second rule was applicable after all. It is important to keep a balanced view of the goings on here, in both directions.

noses are well out of joint in one north mayo club over promises made about ground redevelopment and the sudden lack of league games they were promised.