|
Post by kerrygold on Jan 23, 2015 10:50:59 GMT
If you read my post correctly you'll see I was comparing the Kildare version of '98 to the Mayo teams that have lost finals. Which is totally different to the point you are making in the above post. You mentioned McGeeney and I reacted to that. My post here is the basis of my utter annoyance as a result of the ubiquity of praise of Kildare in the media... that has by osmosis seeped into the minds of some of the users on here. My points on Kildare football are always fair, balanced, reasonable, accurate and to the point, unlike some the stuff that is peddled here.
|
|
|
Post by Annascaultilidie on Jan 23, 2015 10:56:12 GMT
You mentioned McGeeney and I reacted to that. My post here is the basis of my utter annoyance as a result of the ubiquity of praise of Kildare in the media... that has by osmosis seeped into the minds of some of the users on here. My points on Kildare football are always fair, balanced, reasonable, accurate and to the point, unlike some the stuff that is peddled here. Recall I didn't quote your post directly. All I have done here is present the list of teams that Kildare have beaten and it is not impressive --- and that is an objective point based on county rankings. If you want me to be subjective I am just going to say that they are not very good at kicking the ball.
|
|
|
Post by kerrygold on Jan 23, 2015 11:05:42 GMT
My points on Kildare football are always fair, balanced, reasonable, accurate and to the point, unlike some the stuff that is peddled here. Recall I didn't quote your post directly. All I have done here is present the list of teams that Kildare have beaten and it is not impressive --- and that is an objective point based on county rankings. You also have to look at the games they lost by a whisker to get a balanced picture of their standing in the game during the McGeeney era. The Leinster final of 2007, All-Ireland semi final of 2010, Leinster semi final and All-Ireland quarter final of 2011.
|
|
|
Post by Annascaultilidie on Jan 23, 2015 11:16:18 GMT
Recall I didn't quote your post directly. All I have done here is present the list of teams that Kildare have beaten and it is not impressive --- and that is an objective point based on county rankings. You also have to look at the games they lost by a whisker to get a balanced picture of their standing in the game during the McGeeney era. The Leinster final of 2007, All-Ireland semi final of 2010, Leinster semi final and All-Ireland quarter final of 2011. What about the games they won by a whisker?! These things balance out over the years. They still lost those games and I repeat: champions, real winners, don't let luck get in the way or moreover use it as an excuse for their failings. For example, I don't think Dublin were lucky in the final in 2011 --- they scored 1-03 in the last five minutes! Dublin made it happen for themselves. The subjective view would be Kildare can't because they are not good enough. No team is consistently unlucky --- that is a fallacy in my opinion. Agree to disagree? --- I don't see me changing my mind on Kildare. I think they were very good to consistently beat the teams ranked below them but that is all they did. These are the facts.
|
|
|
Post by kerrygold on Jan 23, 2015 11:38:57 GMT
You also have to look at the games they lost by a whisker to get a balanced picture of their standing in the game during the McGeeney era. The Leinster final of 2007, All-Ireland semi final of 2010, Leinster semi final and All-Ireland quarter final of 2011. What about the games they won by a whisker?! These things balance out over the years. They still lost those games and I repeat: champions, real winners, don't let luck get in the way or moreover use it as an excuse for their failings. For example, I don't think Dublin were lucky in the final in 2011 --- they scored 1-03 in the last five minutes! Dublin made it happen for themselves. The subjective view would be Kildare can't because they are not good enough. No team is consistently unlucky --- that is a fallacy in my opinion. Agree to disagree? --- I don't see me changing my mind on Kildare. I think they were very good to consistently beat the teams ranked below them but that is all they did. These are the facts. I'm not asking you to change your opinion. If I see what I think is an inaccurate comment I'll post on it. Micko's era aside in Kildare, Kildare under McGeeney has been Kildare's most successful era since 1935 when they lost the final. I've never claimed that Kildare were/are world beaters other than to point out they were unlucky in some games under McGeeney and came out on the wrong side of some questionable refereeing decisions.
|
|
|
Post by Annascaultilidie on Jan 23, 2015 11:51:10 GMT
What about the games they won by a whisker?! These things balance out over the years. They still lost those games and I repeat: champions, real winners, don't let luck get in the way or moreover use it as an excuse for their failings. For example, I don't think Dublin were lucky in the final in 2011 --- they scored 1-03 in the last five minutes! Dublin made it happen for themselves. The subjective view would be Kildare can't because they are not good enough. No team is consistently unlucky --- that is a fallacy in my opinion. Agree to disagree? --- I don't see me changing my mind on Kildare. I think they were very good to consistently beat the teams ranked below them but that is all they did. These are the facts. I'm not asking you to change your opinion. If I see what I think is an inaccurate comment I'll post on it. Micko's era aside in Kildare, Kildare under McGeeney has been Kildare's most successful era since 1935 when they lost the final. I've never claimed that Kildare were/are world beaters other than to point out they were unlucky in some games under McGeeney and came out on the wrong side of some questionable refereeing decisions. What is the point of debate if not to change the mind of your opponent? Is this referring to Rashers post? I haven't said anything inaccurate.
|
|
|
Post by Mickmack on Jan 23, 2015 18:33:00 GMT
Cork didn't waste time. Not one second. They played in straight in extra time. Had the ref blown Clare could not have complained at time keeping. By your logic Cork would have deserved to win it had he blown up despite the fact that their main attacking ploy was to dive to manufacture close in frees which Nash was capable of goaling. The two games between Kerry and Mayo in 2014 were classic contests. Little or nothing between them really. Mayo reached a certain standard in 2014 that lots of All Ireland winners haven't. For example, Mayo in 2014 were better than Cork in 2010. Like Kildare in 1998, they deserve to win an All Ireland in my opinion. A few very soft frees to Kerry in the first period of extra time plus the terrible clash of heads between OConnor and OShea were key moments and Kerrys subs in extra time....Paul Geaney and Jonathan Lyne tipped the scales. But in my opinion this Mayo team reached the required level to be deserving of ultimate success. And, thats all I have to say on the matter. Deserved doesn't matter a toss. As in life, there are winners and there are losers. Deserving doesn't come into it and players/elites/champions don't look back and say "we deserved that". Real champions don't allow luck play a role. I must say that I find this a bit extraordinary. What about those silver medalists who came second to Michelle Smyth in the Olympics. Did they deserve to win gold!! Or were they in some way undeserving of gold. There are so many vagaries at play that the difference between winning and losing is sometimes no more than a lottery. Such vagaries are luck, injuries, cheating by an opponent, corporate imperatives, bad refereeing. Do you disagree Mr annauscaul?
|
|
seamo
Fanatical Member
Posts: 2,016
|
Post by seamo on Jan 23, 2015 21:37:01 GMT
Deserved doesn't matter a toss. As in life, there are winners and there are losers. Deserving doesn't come into it and players/elites/champions don't look back and say "we deserved that". Real champions don't allow luck play a role. I must say that I find this a bit extraordinary. What about those silver medalists who came second to Michelle Smyth in the Olympics. Did they deserve to win gold!!
Or were they in some way undeserving of gold. There are so many vagaries at play that the difference between winning and losing is sometimes no more than a lottery. Such vagaries are luck, injuries, cheating by an opponent, corporate imperatives, bad refereeing. Do you disagree Mr annauscaul? ah come on Mick, your better than that!!!! They weren't unlucky, they were cheated. Terrible comparison.
|
|
|
Post by Mickmack on Jan 23, 2015 23:54:15 GMT
I don't agree seamo.
what I said was There are so many vagaries at play that the difference between winning and losing is sometimes no more than a lottery. Such vagaries are luck, injuries, cheating by an opponent, corporate imperatives, bad refereeing.
I just don't agree that the winner is always deserving. Annascaul doesn't seem to allow any for any circumstance where the winner isn't deserving of it.
|
|
|
Post by Annascaultilidie on Jan 24, 2015 2:30:20 GMT
I don't agree seamo. what I said was There are so many vagaries at play that the difference between winning and losing is sometimes no more than a lottery. Such vagaries are luck, injuries, cheating by an opponent, corporate imperatives, bad refereeing.
I just don't agree that the winner is always deserving. Annascaul doesn't seem to allow any for any circumstance where the winner isn't deserving of it. SOMETIMES
|
|
seamo
Fanatical Member
Posts: 2,016
|
Post by seamo on Jan 24, 2015 10:35:11 GMT
I don't agree seamo. what I said was There are so many vagaries at play that the difference between winning and losing is sometimes no more than a lottery. Such vagaries are luck, injuries, cheating by an opponent, corporate imperatives, bad refereeing.
I just don't agree that the winner is always deserving. Annascaul doesn't seem to allow any for any circumstance where the winner isn't deserving of it. Yeah I agreed with your initial idea of that. I do think that it's fair to say some teams deserved an AI, such as Roscommon in 80's and I'm sure plenty others. It's pretty damn unlucky for instance if two of the greatest football teams of all time happen to be playing in your era. ...But the debate has mutated by now into how unlucky Kildare were!!!! Kildare were never cheated out of any win(like those who face Michelle de Brun!). An individual or a team can't control what era they live/play in, nor can they control if their opponent is cheating, that's unlucky and they then deserve more than they get. Kildare never suffered from any of that, they made their own luck.
|
|
|
Post by kerrybhoy06 on Jan 24, 2015 10:44:06 GMT
I don't agree seamo. what I said was There are so many vagaries at play that the difference between winning and losing is sometimes no more than a lottery. Such vagaries are luck, injuries, cheating by an opponent, corporate imperatives, bad refereeing.
I just don't agree that the winner is always deserving. Annascaul doesn't seem to allow any for any circumstance where the winner isn't deserving of it. Ok so back to the original debate- which AI did Mayo deserve, who didnt deserve theirs and why?
|
|
|
Post by kerrygold on Jan 24, 2015 11:04:59 GMT
I don't agree seamo. what I said was There are so many vagaries at play that the difference between winning and losing is sometimes no more than a lottery. Such vagaries are luck, injuries, cheating by an opponent, corporate imperatives, bad refereeing.
I just don't agree that the winner is always deserving. Annascaul doesn't seem to allow any for any circumstance where the winner isn't deserving of it. Yeah I agreed with your initial idea of that. I do think that it's fair to say some teams deserved an AI, such as Roscommon in 80's and I'm sure plenty others. It's pretty damn unlucky for instance if two of the greatest football teams of all time happen to be playing in your era. ...But the debate has mutated by now into how unlucky Kildare were!!!! Kildare were never cheated out of any win(like those who face Michelle de Brun!). An individual or a team can't control what era they live/play in, nor can they control if their opponent is cheating, that's unlucky and they then deserve more than they get. Kildare never suffered from any of that, they made their own luck. That's very true, you make your own luck. Kildare didn't make enough of their own luck at times. That is the nature of sport. On the flip side, just because a team didn't make enough of their own luck doesn't mean that they were not also unlucky at times in the way a game might have panned out. Mayo were brutally unlucky at the end of the drawn 1996 final. On the question of real champions as suggested by Annascaul, for me, the real champions are the ones that soldier on for a decade or more in less fashionable counties without success. The Declan Brownes,John Galvin, Glen Ryan(16 seasons), Eamonn O'Hara, etc. Lads that keep trying.
|
|
|
Post by Mickmack on Jan 24, 2015 12:03:41 GMT
I don't agree seamo. what I said was There are so many vagaries at play that the difference between winning and losing is sometimes no more than a lottery. Such vagaries are luck, injuries, cheating by an opponent, corporate imperatives, bad refereeing.
I just don't agree that the winner is always deserving. Annascaul doesn't seem to allow any for any circumstance where the winner isn't deserving of it. Ok so back to the original debate- which AI did Mayo deserve, who didnt deserve theirs and why? My position is that team attains a certain of excellence/standard. I think Kildare in late 90s and the Mayo of 2014 reached that. So did the Dubs of 1990 to 1994. Whether a team goes on to lift Sam depends then on other factors such as injuries, refs, the CCCC etc etc. The Dubs of 1995 got a huge break from the ref at the death. This Mayo may never win Sam but they deserve to in my opinion after 2014. Its takes two to make classic heroic matches. Now you are entitled to disagree with me and that's fine. I would like you to answer me this...... Were Cork in 2010 better than Mayo in 2014.
|
|
|
Post by Mickmack on Jan 24, 2015 12:05:07 GMT
I don't agree seamo. what I said was There are so many vagaries at play that the difference between winning and losing is sometimes no more than a lottery. Such vagaries are luck, injuries, cheating by an opponent, corporate imperatives, bad refereeing.
I just don't agree that the winner is always deserving. Annascaul doesn't seem to allow any for any circumstance where the winner isn't deserving of it. SOMETIMES Sometimes what? What kind of an answer is that from such an erudite man?
|
|
|
Post by kerrybhoy06 on Jan 24, 2015 12:17:13 GMT
Ok so back to the original debate- which AI did Mayo deserve, who didnt deserve theirs and why? My position is that team attains a certain of excellence/standard. I think Kildare in late 90s and the Mayo of 2014 reached that. So did the Dubs of 1990 to 1994. Whether a team goes on to lift Sam depends then on other factors such as injuries, refs, the CCCC etc etc. The Dubs of 1995 got a huge break from the ref at the death. This Mayo may never win Sam but they deserve to in my opinion after 2014. Its takes two to make classic heroic matches. Now you are entitled to disagree with me and that's fine. I would like you to answer me this...... Were Cork in 2010 better than Mayo in 2014. But did Cork not "deserve" by your logic? They had been there or there abouts for several years and thats the criteria that you are using to put forward Mayo's claim. Kildare of the late 90's were grand- 2/3 years of good performances but jeez Mayo are miles ahead of them in achievement and they havent won an AI so Kildare shouldnt even be in this debate. Mayo of 2014 didnt not deserve an AI- they lost to Kerry and to be honest, Donegal would have beaten them too. They are the perennial whingers- always someone elses fault, they are the Liverpool of the GAA. The reasons why Mayo dont win are- they are too predictable, too naive tactically (the main one), lack of scoring forwards outside O Connor, they havent got the mentality of a winning team as evidenced by constantly coming up short
|
|
|
Post by Mickmack on Jan 24, 2015 12:39:57 GMT
Well I think Mayo in 2014 are well ahead of that Cork side. That Cork side were house devils in Munster but bottled it consistently in Croke Park. Some very sinister CCCC actions in 2010 had a huge bearing on that championship that year.
I'll ask you the question another way. Did Mayo in 2014 reached a level that Cork didn't reach or didn't have to reach in 2010 to win the all Ireland
|
|
keane
Fanatical Member
Posts: 1,267
|
Post by keane on Jan 24, 2015 14:51:26 GMT
Mayo in 2013 would have won the All Ireland a lot of other years. That was a genuinely top notch team, definitely better than Dublin '11, Cork '10 - probably Kerry '15 as well.
|
|
|
Post by Mickmack on Jan 24, 2015 15:08:37 GMT
between 1996 and 2001, Meath were a great team. No back door till 2001 so twas dog eat dog. Context is everything when evaluating achievements. Kildare won two Leinster in that time and got the better of Meath. Meath has Dowd, Geragthy, Giles, McDermott. Meath humiliated Kerry in 2001.
The current Kildare side arent a patch on that team. The current side are honest triers but at a lower level.
|
|
|
Post by kerrybhoy06 on Jan 24, 2015 15:55:55 GMT
This dealing in hypotheticals does no one any good- I'm sure we could spend all day evaluating teams from different eras but what you are missing is thst the game moves on/changes almost every year and thus teams need to constantly improve.
Mayo of 2013 May have been better than 50 previous winners but they were not the best team in 2013- so they didn't win.
Also calling Cork house devils but bottling it in Croker? for godsake that's Mayo down to a tee.
|
|
|
Post by MrRasherstoyou on Jan 25, 2015 13:33:04 GMT
Well you certainly made an extraordinary sweeping statement out of it old chap! Anything outside the Pale indeed? I think you'll find that The Pale included quite a bit of the current-day most populated areas of Kildare. You would also be suggesting that this gentleman and scholar and proud supporter of The Three Castles would consider the likes of The Royal County on equal par and to the exclusion of or detriment of others. Almost the equivalent of saying Kerry would prefer Cork to win over any other county! Whatever about what-ifs, here's the fact, also heretofore stated by this scholar on this very vessel of communication - Of all the other counties in Leinster, with the possible exception of the Cinderella Cill Mhantáin, I would have liked to see Kildare have success, and to generate and maintain a serious rivalry with the other top Leinster teams. What I have objected to is the never-ending mythologising of Kildare's bad luck and 'should-have-beens' since Mr. Vincent Murphy, Esquire of this Parish registered a rather fortuitous three-point score at a momentous point in the National Football League Final of 1991. Also at that time and since, Kildare supporters and associates have invested a huge input towards achieving success with the county football seniors. Without doubt it contributed to some of their progress in the ensuing period but too often has been overshadowed by an extraordinary media-friendly propoganda and inability to accept shortcomings in defeat. At the very least people's annoyance at this culture of defeatism and denial is honesty in contrast to the plamásing and condescension that weaker counties hear all too often from the power-houses of the game. Isn't it about time you got more upset about the state of football outside Kerry and Cork in Munster rather than Kildare's much-supported and resourced travails? A well polished antidote to some of the refereeing decisions that went with the dubs, media campaigns promoting the dubs and some of the calls in favour of Dublin players from the various Croker bodies at Dubs Park. 10 out of 10. My own position on Kildare, they have been very unlucky under McGeeney in recent years in a number of games. Galway were the better team on the day in the '98 final and deserved to win the game. Injuries aside, Kildare did not control enough of the controllables associated with All-Ireland final day to close out the game. Much the same as Mayo have failed to do in finals also. Ha ha, now being a bitter Kildare fan I CAN Understand! Good luck today with the 3-in-row bid
|
|
|
Post by kerrygold on Jan 25, 2015 18:24:12 GMT
A well polished antidote to some of the refereeing decisions that went with the dubs, media campaigns promoting the dubs and some of the calls in favour of Dublin players from the various Croker bodies at Dubs Park. 10 out of 10. My own position on Kildare, they have been very unlucky under McGeeney in recent years in a number of games. Galway were the better team on the day in the '98 final and deserved to win the game. Injuries aside, Kildare did not control enough of the controllables associated with All-Ireland final day to close out the game. Much the same as Mayo have failed to do in finals also. Ha ha, now being a bitter Kildare fan I CAN Understand! Good luck today with the 3-in-row bid Just interested in accurate and fair debate. Pressure on now to win the big four this year?
|
|
|
Post by MrRasherstoyou on Jan 25, 2015 21:27:14 GMT
between 1996 and 2001, Meath were a great team. No back door till 2001 so twas dog eat dog. Context is everything when evaluating achievements. Kildare won two Leinster in that time and got the better of Meath. Meath has Dowd, Geragthy, Giles, McDermott. Meath humiliated Kerry in 2001. The current Kildare side arent a patch on that team. The current side are honest triers but at a lower level. That Meath team then went on to get a fair aul beating by Galway in the final, the same Galway that some believe were lucky to beat Kildare in 98. Kerry simply had a total systems failure that day. Kildare had their chance to put the so-called record straight against Galway in 2001 and didn't. I seem to recall more hard-luck stories. I don't recall the same media being afforded to other teams who came close. The Dublin teams they beat in 1998 and 2001 were not great by any manner of means. Meath 96-2002 were a bit like Tyrone 2003-2011. They had great years and poor years. They also lost to a fairly ordinary Offaly side. One of their All-Is was against a far from great Cork side in 99. If Kildare were so unlucky in 98 they could have been back in 99 and would have had a golden chance against Cork. Some have cited Mayo by comparison, they were genuinely a bit unlucky not to do it in 96 (albeit I still think they blew it) but the only time I can recall people saying they were unlucky when they clearly werent was in 2013. With Kildare it has been every single time they lose a big game by a few points or less. Kerrygold it was I think that mentioned the 2007 LFinal, about Kildare losing by a whisker or something. I presume he meant 2009? In that game Kildare were at least level at one stage in the 2nd half, playing with a gale and rain behind them, and Dublin were reduced to 14. They lost by 4. Dublin had a new and completely unproven coach trying out a new way of playing. How anyone can use that game as evidence of Kildare being somehow unlucky is beyond belief and renders pretty much all of their "balanced fair discussion" claims as anything but. Not to mention the other outrageous comments. Naturally 2011 was brought up. Another one where Kildare had the game at their mercy with Dublin reduced to 14 and yet they trailed by 4 approaching the last 3 or 4 minutes. Dublin withdrew, Kildare got a freak goal, Dublin got a fortunate (but completely legitimate) free. Not a gimme either which Brogan put over. And all that some people want to remember is that Kildare were unlucky. Dublin would have murdered them in the replay.
|
|
|
Post by kerrygold on Jan 26, 2015 9:20:36 GMT
between 1996 and 2001, Meath were a great team. No back door till 2001 so twas dog eat dog. Context is everything when evaluating achievements. Kildare won two Leinster in that time and got the better of Meath. Meath has Dowd, Geragthy, Giles, McDermott. Meath humiliated Kerry in 2001. The current Kildare side arent a patch on that team. The current side are honest triers but at a lower level. That Meath team then went on to get a fair aul beating by Galway in the final, the same Galway that some believe were lucky to beat Kildare in 98. Kerry simply had a total systems failure that day. Kildare had their chance to put the so-called record straight against Galway in 2001 and didn't. I seem to recall more hard-luck stories. I don't recall the same media being afforded to other teams who came close. The Dublin teams they beat in 1998 and 2001 were not great by any manner of means. Meath 96-2002 were a bit like Tyrone 2003-2011. They had great years and poor years. They also lost to a fairly ordinary Offaly side. One of their All-Is was against a far from great Cork side in 99. If Kildare were so unlucky in 98 they could have been back in 99 and would have had a golden chance against Cork. Some have cited Mayo by comparison, they were genuinely a bit unlucky not to do it in 96 (albeit I still think they blew it) but the only time I can recall people saying they were unlucky when they clearly werent was in 2013. With Kildare it has been every single time they lose a big game by a few points or less. Kerrygold it was I think that mentioned the 2007 LFinal, about Kildare losing by a whisker or something. I presume he meant 2009? In that game Kildare were at least level at one stage in the 2nd half, playing with a gale and rain behind them, and Dublin were reduced to 14. They lost by 4. Dublin had a new and completely unproven coach trying out a new way of playing. How anyone can use that game as evidence of Kildare being somehow unlucky is beyond belief and renders pretty much all of their "balanced fair discussion" claims as anything but. Not to mention the other outrageous comments. Naturally 2011 was brought up. Another one where Kildare had the game at their mercy with Dublin reduced to 14 and yet they trailed by 4 approaching the last 3 or 4 minutes. Dublin withdrew, Kildare got a freak goal, Dublin got a fortunate (but completely legitimate) free. Not a gimme either which Brogan put over. And all that some people want to remember is that Kildare were unlucky. Dublin would have murdered them in the replay. Such indignation because people are discussing games in which a particular county were unlucky to lose.
|
|
|
Post by homerj on Jan 26, 2015 11:27:35 GMT
Kerry V Dublin final i think....
what do people think will be our championship 15 for the first game? the team didnt change a whole pile after the Clare game apart from injuries. in fact, 14 of the lads that started against Clare, played in the All Ireland final with Darran Sullivan the only one to miss out. Donaghy, BJ Keane, Mahony, Donnacha Walsh all came on that day also and with JOD injured, you pretty much had almost the exact same players involved from start to finish - Kieran O Leary the only other player i think that played in the All Ireland that wasnt involved in first round.
on that basis, the 20/21 players who line out in the first round, are likely to be the same lads who will be playing if we get to the final so its a good indicator of what we can expect.
going to be really interesting to see where Tommy Walsh and Gooch fit into this team along with 1 or 2 new faces to freshen things up.
|
|
|
Post by MrRasherstoyou on Jan 26, 2015 13:54:29 GMT
That Meath team then went on to get a fair aul beating by Galway in the final, the same Galway that some believe were lucky to beat Kildare in 98. Kerry simply had a total systems failure that day. Kildare had their chance to put the so-called record straight against Galway in 2001 and didn't. I seem to recall more hard-luck stories. I don't recall the same media being afforded to other teams who came close. The Dublin teams they beat in 1998 and 2001 were not great by any manner of means. Meath 96-2002 were a bit like Tyrone 2003-2011. They had great years and poor years. They also lost to a fairly ordinary Offaly side. One of their All-Is was against a far from great Cork side in 99. If Kildare were so unlucky in 98 they could have been back in 99 and would have had a golden chance against Cork. Some have cited Mayo by comparison, they were genuinely a bit unlucky not to do it in 96 (albeit I still think they blew it) but the only time I can recall people saying they were unlucky when they clearly werent was in 2013. With Kildare it has been every single time they lose a big game by a few points or less. Kerrygold it was I think that mentioned the 2007 LFinal, about Kildare losing by a whisker or something. I presume he meant 2009? In that game Kildare were at least level at one stage in the 2nd half, playing with a gale and rain behind them, and Dublin were reduced to 14. They lost by 4. Dublin had a new and completely unproven coach trying out a new way of playing. How anyone can use that game as evidence of Kildare being somehow unlucky is beyond belief and renders pretty much all of their "balanced fair discussion" claims as anything but. Not to mention the other outrageous comments. Naturally 2011 was brought up. Another one where Kildare had the game at their mercy with Dublin reduced to 14 and yet they trailed by 4 approaching the last 3 or 4 minutes. Dublin withdrew, Kildare got a freak goal, Dublin got a fortunate (but completely legitimate) free. Not a gimme either which Brogan put over. And all that some people want to remember is that Kildare were unlucky. Dublin would have murdered them in the replay. You know it's 'discussion over' time when the two-liner wind-ups start. Fair enough, I'll bow to your expertise on the subject of indignation. As a perennialy 'indignant' Kerry fan you must enjoy the bauble of a weaker county that people feel sorry for
|
|
|
Post by kerrygold on Jan 26, 2015 19:08:29 GMT
You know it's 'discussion over' time when the two-liner wind-ups start. Fair enough, I'll bow to your expertise on the subject of indignation. As a perennialy 'indignant' Kerry fan you must enjoy the bauble of a weaker county that people feel sorry for
|
|
|
Post by onlykerry on Feb 12, 2015 16:11:43 GMT
Bookies still seeing 2015 as a small field of realistic runners. Dublin are firming up to 6/5 (from 5/4) Kerry remain a distant second favourite at 7/2 Mayo are steady at 13/2 Cork drifting slightly from 8/1 to 9/1 Donegal drifting in from 11/1 to 10/1 Biggest mover from the pre-season odds are Armagh going from 20/1 to 33/1.
|
|
|
Post by kerrygold on Feb 12, 2015 16:54:59 GMT
Bookies still seeing 2015 as a small field of realistic runners. Dublin are firming up to 6/5 (from 5/4) Kerry remain a distant second favourite at 7/2 Mayo are steady at 13/2 Cork drifting slightly from 8/1 to 9/1 Donegal drifting in from 11/1 to 10/1 Biggest mover from the pre-season odds are Armagh going from 20/1 to 33/1. An interesting field and odds. Not sure Dublin should be such clear favourites, big pressure on them to atone for their capitulation in 2014 when Donegal turned on a small amount of heat in the kitchen. There are bound to be doubts in the back of the Dublin players minds, aligned with the pressure to accumulate All-Irelands from this current era of Dublin players. Both could become pressure cooker situations in the white hot heat of Croker. It will be interesting to see where Kerry in transition will sit in 2015, can the new young players bring a little bit of swagger to the game on the back of winning an All-Ireland. Will the Gooch and TW bring anything new to the table. A 10% increase in Kerry's collective collateral could potentially make the above odds very interesting and add a third pressure cooker point to Dublin's quest for more Sams. 2015 could be a rip roaring championship with some very serious and heavy hitters clashing in Croke Park.
|
|
|
Post by Mickmack on Feb 12, 2015 22:23:02 GMT
a rip roaring final 3 games but the rest will be the usual mismatches I think
|
|