|
Post by southward on Sept 21, 2015 10:37:51 GMT
Control,
Can you get rid of this clown please? He's nothing to add to any debate here except a display of ignorance and immaturity. Really, we don't need this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2015 17:40:53 GMT
I see the full verdict of the Connolly appeal has been issued. Doing this the day after the final would make you very cynical about the process. They don't want anyone looking at this too closely.
|
|
|
Post by Mickmack on Sept 21, 2015 22:05:34 GMT
I see the full verdict of the Connolly appeal has been issued. Doing this the day after the final would make you very cynical about the process. They don't want anyone looking at this too closely. No cynics on this site thankfully. Lots of realists though
|
|
falveyb2k
Fanatical Member
"The way this man played today, if there was a flood he'd walk on water. Jack O Shea"
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by falveyb2k on Sept 22, 2015 1:11:13 GMT
Worrying that one of the panel doesn't even agree with their own ruling saying it sets a dangerous precedent. Guarantee you that McMahon serves no time for what he did, the disciplinary system is a complete and utter joke. Somebody will have to lose their eyesight or something of the same ilk for their to be a huge change
|
|
|
Post by Annascaultilidie on Sept 22, 2015 6:46:32 GMT
I think it a little unfair that the GAA - an amateur organisation - has to have a disciplinary system in place that respects legal norms.
It sounds like the judgement referred to legal-type issues rather than the GAA rulebook.
Surely if you 'sign-up' to play with an amateur organisation you play by their rules? I want the process to be overhauled but it shouldn't be as watertight and technical as a legal process.
|
|
|
Post by kerrygold on Sept 22, 2015 7:14:38 GMT
Connolly's DRA reprieve 'fundamentally wrong' DRA panel member Brian Rennick calls decision to lift ban an "unjustifiable precedent"
Colm Keys
PUBLISHED 22/09/2015
One of the members of the Disputes Resolution Authority panel that set aside Diarmuid Connolly's recent one-match ban as a result of his red card against Mayo in the drawn All-Ireland semi-final has come out strongly against the decision made, describing it as "fundamentally wrong."
Solicitor Brian Rennick has challenged the reasoning of fellow members Hugh O'Flaherty and David Nohilly that the case against the Dublin footballer was "a breach of fair procedures, a significant impairment of his rights and was disproportionate, irrational and unfair."
Rennick claims the case should have been sent back to the Central Hearings Committee for reprocessing to allow for the additional information requested by Connolly to be heard.
A 43-page document sets out both sides in what is only the second DRA panel ever to deliver a majority-only decision.
The verdict of the majority was based on information which Connolly had sought from the Central Competition Controls Committee relating to the specifics of what communication between the officials there had been in relation his altercation with Lee Keegan that led to the red card for striking.
Connolly had requested seven different points of information based on what linesman Conor Lane had seen from the Hogan Stand side of the field and what, if any, communication was there regarding any other Mayo player apart from Keegan. He was able to satisfy the majority that the information provided was not sufficient, despite their contention that "the presumption of accuracy of the referee's report stands in full."
Self-defence
The player had brought 11 different points of argument to the DRA, among them his claim that his action was in self-defence. Interestingly, the majority observed that they "do not agree with the proposition that a player is not entitled to defend oneself.
"The Claimant gave evidence to this Tribunal of being 'choked' etc., at the time of the altercation. Whilst that may or may not have been case is not for us to decide, but to say no such defence exists absolutely is not correct in our opinion. We shall go no further on this point."
The substantive issue was that the additional information that Connolly had sought had not been considered by the Central Hearings Committee and thus the case brought against the Dublin player was unfair.
The majority ruled Connolly was "not given details of the entire evidence against him (as was his right under rule), he was not given an opportunity to test that evidence, particularly, the evidence based on hearsay (linesman's evidence) and was not afforded any right to scrutinise and question the entire evidence against him."
The CHC, they argued, erred and failed to take account of potential relevant considerations to the detriment of the claimant (Connolly).
Because it was such a "serious sanction," they suggested, "a higher standard is required of the disciplinary bodies."
In the circumstances of Connolly finding himself engaged in the process for a third successive night, within 24 hours of the replay, they ruled that it would be "unduly harsh and disproportionate to remit the matter back for further reprocessing in the circumstances."
Rennick rejected this however. He contended that all the information needed had been before the CHC and that Connolly's argument relating to the evidence had not been "canvassed" before the DRA hearing.
"The obvious question arises as to what information was withheld from the Claimant in respect of the infraction that was alleged? The answer is none," he wrote.
"The only evidence on which the Claimant was dealt with was that which was before the CHC. There was no other evidence against him. What was not put before the CHC was the detail of the altercation between the two players before the infraction occurred."
Information
He said Connolly could have raised the issue of the additional information at the CHC hearing. "The blame for this appears to be left at the door of the CCCC, the Referee and the CHC. That is to ignore the fact that the Claimant could have taken issue with this before the CHC who could in turn have remitted the matter to the CCCC if they saw fit. This was open to the Claimant had he considered that all of this information was in fact relevant to the conduct of his defence."
Describing the decision and reasons for setting aside the Connolly suspension as "fundamentally wrong", Rennick stressed that "in instances where the DRA finds that there has been a breach of fair procedures that can be remedied that the case should be remitted to the CHC for re-hearing with directions as to how to correct the breaches complained of."
He added that the consequences of the majority decision was that a clear Category Three infraction was going unpunished and that was, in his view, "an unjustifiable and undesirable precedent to set in the context of a disciplinary process."
Irish Independen
|
|
|
Post by kerrygold on Sept 22, 2015 7:17:10 GMT
I think it a little unfair that the GAA - an amateur organisation - has to have a disciplinary system in place that respects legal norms. It sounds like the judgement referred to legal-type issues rather than the GAA rulebook. Surely if you 'sign-up' to play with an amateur organisation you play by their rules? I want the process to be overhauled but it shouldn't be as watertight and technical as a legal process. Something is needed all the same to protect players that are targeted with doubling up of suspensions because some bright spark gets a bee in his bonnet.
|
|
|
Post by sullyschoice on Sept 22, 2015 19:46:12 GMT
Have to say (much as I hate to say it) that Mayo did give them a better game than we did and if it were not for that they might not be where they are today. But Mayo4sam is showing the usual pure class in turning up this morning with this comment. We weren't arrogant but there's nothing wrong with arrogance in its proper place. Honest arrogance is better than hypocritical humility. Wayupnorth, my comments were directed at sully not the majority of kerry supporters. He gave plenty when Mayo were beat by the dubs. You are just a pathetic idiot who adds nothing to this forum. If you had something constructive to say people might engage with you in a civilised manner. You dont, so I will treat you with the contempt you deserve.
|
|
|
Post by mayo4sam on Sept 22, 2015 22:51:44 GMT
You are just a pathetic idiot who adds nothing to this forum. If you had something constructive to say people might engage with you in a civilised manner. You dont, so I will treat you with the contempt you deserve. Wake up Sully good ladeen, you kicked the game away, you had plenty of chances and still couldnt win it. Bernard Brogan had a stinker What was the tactics with the gooch? What happened to Kerry midfield? David Moran getting skinned by Fenton. Im waiting on ya!!!
|
|
|
Post by wayupnorth on Sept 23, 2015 6:01:41 GMT
You are just a pathetic idiot who adds nothing to this forum. If you had something constructive to say people might engage with you in a civilised manner. You dont, so I will treat you with the contempt you deserve. Wake up Sully good ladeen, you kicked the game away, you had plenty of chances and still couldnt win it. Bernard Brogan had a stinker What was the tactics with the gooch? What happened to Kerry midfield? David Moran getting skinned by Fenton. Im waiting on ya!!! Please read the forum rules Mayo4sam (aka Oxymoron). "Vulgar, defamatory, harassing, hateful". It's understandable that seasoned contributors like Sully retaliate.
|
|
|
Post by mayo4sam on Sept 23, 2015 9:55:40 GMT
sullyschoice you are entitled to your opinion, enright should have got the line and mayo would have won. end of You have got to be a politician? Mayo weren't good enough last year. end of Seamo, were Kerry good enough this year?
|
|
|
Post by mayo4sam on Sept 23, 2015 9:56:41 GMT
Wake up Sully good ladeen, you kicked the game away, you had plenty of chances and still couldnt win it. Bernard Brogan had a stinker What was the tactics with the gooch? What happened to Kerry midfield? David Moran getting skinned by Fenton. Im waiting on ya!!! Please read the forum rules Mayo4sam (aka Oxymoron). "Vulgar, defamatory, harassing, hateful". It's understandable that seasoned contributors like Sully retaliate. WayupNorth, you should read the rules just like Sully. Sully is one of those people who can give a slagging but cannot take it. He was quick enough to throw the boot in to Mayo. Karma's a *. I look forward to meeting him in Mac Hale Park in the league. Maigh Eo Abu
|
|
|
Post by wayupnorth on Sept 23, 2015 16:40:31 GMT
Please read the forum rules Mayo4sam (aka Oxymoron). "Vulgar, defamatory, harassing, hateful". It's understandable that seasoned contributors like Sully retaliate. WayupNorth, you should read the rules just like Sully. Sully is one of those people who can give a slagging but cannot take it. He was quick enough to throw the boot in to Mayo. Karma's a *. I look forward to meeting him in Mac Hale Park in the league. Maigh Eo Abu You have just added "threatening" to the above. Time for Control to step in and show the red card I think.
|
|
|
Post by sullyschoice on Sept 23, 2015 16:46:40 GMT
He can threaten me all he wants. A big mouth catches more flies. Anyway his Daddy will make him behave when he is out.....unless of course his daddy is that fat idiot they are all so proud of.
|
|
seamo
Fanatical Member
Posts: 2,016
|
Post by seamo on Sept 23, 2015 18:21:28 GMT
You have got to be a politician? Mayo weren't good enough last year. end of Seamo, were Kerry good enough this year? What's your point? Quit being stupid and read what I quoted you on...now find a similar quote of mine referring to some Dublin player who should have been sent off and then you might have a point . FFS read a-bit and you will actually find that I said after the final that Dublin deserved the win Jesus christ you just keep putting your foot in your mouth!
|
|
|
Post by Annascaultilidie on Sept 24, 2015 6:21:05 GMT
There is a block option. There are a number of idiots on here who Control indulge so you may as well use it.
|
|
|
Post by wayupnorth on Sept 24, 2015 6:32:20 GMT
There is a block option. There are a number of idiots on here who Control indulge so you may as well use it. Thanks Tom. I didn't know this. A very useful feature.
|
|
|
Post by sullyschoice on Sept 24, 2015 14:56:42 GMT
Very useful feature. I wont miss them?
|
|
|
Post by Seoirse Ui Duic on Sept 29, 2015 9:28:54 GMT
Didn't know where to leave this lovely piece by our biggest supporter, Joe "I'm always right and I know it" Brolly:
Joe Brolly: Football awards – baaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! on September 27, 2015 7:27 pm /
SWEEP IT UP…Colm Cavanagh was as good as anyone THE Sunday Game Team of the Year and Player of the Year illustrates the point that the old language of football hasn’t caught up with the new game.
So, there was a conventional selection of backs, midfielders and forwards even though no one really plays in those positions any longer, except the goalie, and the Player of the Year went to a lively wing half-back who couldn’t lace the boots of the country’s best players.
“No Colm Cavanagh?” I said. “Sure all he did was sweep,” said Ciaran Whelan. “Well” I said, “you chose Cian O’Sullivan and that’s all he did.” Ciaran thought about it a minute and said “ Well that’s different.”
Take the full-back position for example. Since the arrival of Jim McGuinness, Neil McGee suddenly became the game’s pre-eminent number 3, “a shoe in” for an All-Star as the media herd might bleat. For seven years before that he wasn’t a shoe in. The transformation can be explained by the fact that with Jim, Neil became one cog in a 13-man defensive system, with a sweeper playing right in front of his man at all times.
In 2012, when I chose as my full-back the entire Donegal outfield save for Colm McFadden, the editor of The Irish Mail e-mailed me back saying “ Is this a joke?” “What’s funny about it?” I said. “ You can’t do it,” he said. “ Well that’s my selection. Take it or leave it.”
Say nowadays there is a truly great player on a team. Like Michael Murphy or Aidan O’Shea. He will immediately (unless you’re playing Mayo), be double and treble marked. Therefore, his statistics will suffer.
So, Aidan O’Shea, who will shatter any marker man v man, must soldier against three opponents. Against the Dubs he was submerged. Like a cartoon character, he was at times soloing a ball with men holding his arms, legs and face, until the referee gave a free against him for over-holding.
Against Kerry last year, or Monaghan in this year’s Ulster final, Michael Murphy – Donegal’s Roy Keane – was subjected to the same treatment. In fact, it is Murphy’s constant reality. “Sure he was shackled by Vinnie Corey in the Ulster final” bleat the sheep. Yeah, Vinnie and the rest of Monaghan’s fearsome zonal defence. Set them man v man on the square and see how that one comes out for cousin Vinnie. Meanwhile, the lively wing half-back can scamper up the wing on the solo and kick the odd point.
When I pointed out the other night that Murphy had scored 0-8 against Mayo and their sweeper, including 0-4 from play, Colm O’Rourke said and I quote “But he did nothing else.”
The others around the table nodded in agreement. At which point Jesus stopped weeping and burst out laughing. Murphy’s ruthless disposal of Tyrone in the final quarter, his brilliant orchestration of the win over Derry, his destruction of Galway and near single handed fight v Mayo counted for nought against Ciaran Kilkenny’s lively efforts against Westmeath and Kildare and 15 touches in the final. There’s a new criteria: The number of touches. Michael Murphy or Ciaran Kilkenny? In what bizarro-world could the answer be Ciaran Kilkenny? Answer: On the Sunday Game couch. Similarly, Aidan O’Shea v Jack McCaffrey? Answer? Jack McCaffrey. Baaaaaaaaa
The team of the year ought to have looked something like this
1. Keeper: Rory Beggan (in spite of his cringe-worthy dive) 2. The Tyrone zonal defence 3. Brian Fenton 4. Colm Cavanagh 5. Aidan O’Shea 6. Michael Murphy 7. Bernard Brogan 8. Mattie Donnelly 9. Conor McManus 10. Paddy Andrews
For me, the best man marker in the game is Dermot McBride of Derry. With apologies to those alert to double entendres, I call him the Black Hole, since any forward who approaches him disappears into some other dimension not to be seen until he emerges on the subs’ bench. However, I accept Derry didn’t advance far enough for him to get one, even if he put McBrearty in his pocket and fed him on farts.
As for individual awards, Sweeper of the Year goes to Colm Cavanagh, who was simply perfect in the role. Tyrone didn’t concede a goal after McElhinney’s opportunistic volley in the preliminary round and never looked like conceding one. A lot of this was down to Colm, who understood and played the role to perfection.
Finally, Player of the Year is between two greats, O’Shea and Murphy. O’Shea was just more devastating this year. The fact he would put McCaffrey in his pocket and feed him on farts is not believed to be relevant at RTE. comment@gaeliclife.com Murphy on the square
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 9:58:36 GMT
So joes team of the year has 4 non ulster players in a year where the top three teams have been Dublin, Kerry, Mayo. Go figure.
|
|
|
Post by kerrygold on Sept 29, 2015 11:01:30 GMT
This is the same Tyrone zonal defence plus C. Cavanagh as sweeper that conceded 18 points to Kerry in the semi-final. What a clown..............
|
|
fitz
Fanatical Member
Red sky at night get off my land
Posts: 1,719
|
Post by fitz on Sept 29, 2015 11:14:53 GMT
Aidan O'Shea POTY - he wouldn't even defend himself in court on that
|
|
|
Post by kerrygold on Sept 30, 2015 7:11:04 GMT
Only chaos can follow if justice is not seen to be done John Greene
One of the great fears in the wider GAA community is the idea of elitism becoming firmly established as a principle. Yes, it's there - see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil, and all that - but it is not welcome.
That was at the core of the resistance to the GPA in its early years. The idea that an association to protect the interests of a so-called elite group within the GAA rankled with the grassroots (and who's to say there isn't still a hang-up on that point?) and any time there is a suggestion of elitism it will provoke a similar response.
And it is this very point which is at the heart of the DRA's decision to quash the one-match ban imposed on Diarmuid Connolly after he was sent off in Dublin's drawn All-Ireland semi-final with Mayo last month. The decision meant Connolly was free to participate in the replay six days later and angered a lot of people. It baffled them too. The publication last week of the DRA's full report has done little to change that.
The DRA panel for the hearing comprised of former Supreme Court judge Hugh O'Flaherty and solicitors David Nohilly and Brian Rennick. We now know that the decision to quash the suspension, even though the sending-off by referee Joe McQuillan was not overturned, was a two-to-one decision, with Rennick as the dissenting voice.
Ultimately, the reasoning behind the decision - as revealed in the report - is as troubling as the decision itself. There is a lot of technical detail but it is very difficult to see how O'Flaherty and Nohilly arrived at the point where they felt it was justifiable to quash the suspension.
The Central Hearings Committee (CHC) was Connolly's first port of call and having heard the case a one-match ban - which is the recommended sanction for a player sent off for striking with the hand or fist, a Category III offence - was imposed. Connolly's appeal to the Central Appeals Commitee (CAC) failed.
In a lengthy outline of his opposition to the DRA's decision to find in Connolly's favour, Rennick is unequivocal: "There are no special circumstances in this case which merit a direction that no further action be taken. That is particularly so based on the finding of the CHC, the CAC, and a finding which has not been interfered with by the DRA that the infraction, as alleged, did in fact occur." In other words, that Connolly did strike Lee Keegan as the referee reported. Rennick continues: "The consequence of such a direction in a case such as this is that the claimant [Connolly] having committed a Cat III infraction is unpunished. That in my view is an unjustifiable precedent to set in the context of a disciplinary process."
But the most troubling aspect of the decision is that the nature of the game that Connolly would miss appears to have been a factor in reaching it. This flies in the face of the ethos of the GAA and its principles of fairness and equality. In theory, there is no distinction between the various levels of competition in the sense that the same codes and rules apply.
This does not appear to be a view shared by O'Flaherty and Nohilly, who write: "In this instance, the consequence for the claimant was suspension from an All-Ireland semi-final (replay) match. This has to be construed as a serious sanction and therefore a higher standard is required of the disciplinary bodies in circumstances such as this."
If this is to be held up now as a precedent, then only chaos can follow. Again, Rennick does not hold back. "I do not subscribe to that view as to do so would be to draw a clear distinction as and between those who play our games at a local level and those elite players who play at the highest level of inter-county competition. For any player to play in a county final or semi-final in whatever division or at whatever age level is just as important to that player as it is for an elite player to play at the highest level of inter-county competition. The club player deserves no less a standard in respect of the application of the rules and the principles of natural and constitutional justice."
Those intricately involved in implementing the GAA's disciplinary codes at all levels will presumably have been keen to know the reasoning behind the decision but if they are to find any comfort in it, then it will be via Rennick's comments. A properly functioning disciplinary system cannot take account of what games a player will miss if suspended. All that can be of interest are, firstly, the facts of the matter - that the player committed the offence accused of, and, secondly, that fair procedures are applied and the rules of the sporting association were followed. The DRA's findings on both these points in this case are very much open to challenge.
The DRA is 10 years in existence and although often publicly derided the truth is that it has largely served its purpose. The procession to the courts in search of injunctions and judicial reviews has been halted and there is now a bank of decisions which guide and inform new cases. Along with a rule book which has been rewritten to iron out unintended escape hatches and loopholes, the GAA's disciplinary system is considerably better now than it was a decade ago. This latest decision, though, is a setback to the DRA's credibility and has led to calls for another upheaval. It is possible, however, that Rennick's robust opposition will be enough to weaken future attempts to use the Connolly decision as a precedent.
Rennick states there had been no failures on the part of the CHC and CAC in how they handled Connolly's case: "It is my view that the claimant in this instance was afforded fair procedures, there being no misapplication of any of the rules complained of and there being no breach of accepted principles of fair procedures, natural and constitutional justice, such as would entitle this Tribunal to interfere with any of the decisions made."
He continues: "I strenuously disagree therefore with the majority decision which finds that there was a significant impairment of the rights of the claimant, which was disproportionate, irrational and unfair. I am further of the view that the decision and reasons of the majority in this case is fundamentally wrong in that it is in fact based on reasoning the arguments which were not canvassed by the claimant at all and as such are in fact the construct of the majority in circumstances where in fact the Tribunal did not find in favour of the claimant in respect of 10 of the 11 Grounds of Claim as submitted. The single Ground of Claim on which the majority have found in favour of the claimant is firstly a Ground that should not have been considered by the Tribunal as it had not in fact been advanced before the CHC."
No sporting organisation can afford to have either doubt or, worse, scorn, poured on its disciplinary system. It must maintain its credibility. The view within the GAA seems to be that there shouldn't be a knee-jerk reaction. The feeling is that the system works, that cases are dealt with in a timely and efficient manner. (Connolly's hearing and two appeals were all heard within five days of his dismissal.) Calls for an overhaul of the Association's entire disciplinary process will be resisted for now but there is a recognition that, just as in any walk of life, justice has to be seen to be done, and in this instance it wasn't.
Sunday Indo Sport
|
|
|
Post by Annascaultilidie on Sept 30, 2015 11:18:53 GMT
And it is this very point which is at the heart of the DRA's decision to quash the one-match ban imposed on Diarmuid Connolly after he was sent off in Dublin's drawn All-Ireland semi-final with Mayo last month. The decision meant Connolly was free to participate in the replay six days later a couple of hours later and angered a lot of people. It baffled them too. The publication last week of the DRA's full report has done little to change that.
|
|
fitz
Fanatical Member
Red sky at night get off my land
Posts: 1,719
|
Post by fitz on Sept 30, 2015 17:58:30 GMT
Seems like a stand up guy Rennick, an obfuscation specialist mind, a couple of his quotes had me in reading concussion
|
|
|
Post by MrRasherstoyou on Dec 4, 2015 11:47:11 GMT
Poor mayo, god love them they are not going to win it now, I thought that bunch of players really deserved one. Its back to their clubs now for their county club campaigns. They must be sick of this. Not much else you can say really, I think the bus has now left the plaza on them for an all ireland. Cillian Oconnor and his generation might see one, but the reality is that the seasons fly in, and if you dont make your chances count in the moment, kicking the can down the road for future generations is a game that you just dont want to hear or play. It is now or never. .They will try again, but their effort is probably forlorn at this stage with certain personnel being at that age. 2012 and 2013 probably saw them peak as a group. They looked particularly good going into the 2013 final. Spot on, they had nearly everything going for them that day, that summer. They made a really good start to the game too, and then when they really needed it, they got a vital goal to level the game with 20 minutes to go. But the pattern of being switched off for crucial periods in the biggest games/against the best opponents, or lacking killer instinct, and inability to kick enough points from play when the game is really in the fire was already there. In hindsight you can see it in the 2nd half of the 2012 semi-final, early in the final of that year, and to some extent after they had got back into that game, and then also of course last year and this year. You also had that league game in Croker was it earlier this year? I do think management didn't help them this year but they weren't to blame for AOS failing badly to live up to the hype. And speaking of hype, that's another thing they as a county set-up have not managed well. On the plus side they have a man now who looks like a very good coach, and who will bring fresh ideas, and innovation. He clearly has confidence/belief, and proven winning ability. I think Mayo need to also go back a bit to what defines them best, ferocious spells of attack but that within the confines of some sort of swarm defence/possession game style of play. Basically counter-attack Mayo style, I think they actually tried it this year but it wasn't so well organised/carried out. They might benefit from losing in Connaught and coming through the long grass. They still remind me alot of the Dublin team circa 89-95. What made the difference for them in the end was keeping the management in the darkest hours after 92 and 94 final defeats, finding an x-factor player who got goals at vital stages, adding to their midfield arsenal, and having the luck to not have to beat one of the best teams of the era to win. Mayo would need to avoid Dublin next year, and last year showed beyond doubt that they couldn't take Kerry. If Kerry knocked Dublin out would anyone see Mayo beating Kerry if they got to the final? Their only hope really could be a wild-card knocking out both Kerry & Dublin, which looks unlikely.
|
|
|
Post by MrRasherstoyou on Dec 4, 2015 12:00:37 GMT
For Mayo's first goal, the keeper had only one glove on when kicking out the ball and made a mess of the kick out. If he had steadied himself and kept his head, maybe Dublin wouldnt have won the kickout and he wouldnt be facing a shot with one glove hanging off. Yes that was particularly daft I thought! Why didn't he just slow it down a little --- complete lapse in concentration. To be fair to the man, people are giving him a lot of grief for the PMcM goal but I thought he did well under the high ball all day. Looking back at that incident, Hennelly had just taken an age to tie his bootlace, most likely a tactic to slow the game down with Mayo 3 ahead. He then came under pressure from the ref for doing that and didn't have the nerve to maintain the tactic. Having said all that, it was a virtually unstoppable sort of shot from point-blank range, it was a split-second thing once Brogan made the right connection. I actually thought it was a deliberate ploy in response to all the goal chances we have missed from just that sort of chance that Fenton had!
|
|
|
Post by Annascaultilidie on Dec 4, 2015 14:35:14 GMT
Yes that was particularly daft I thought! Why didn't he just slow it down a little --- complete lapse in concentration. To be fair to the man, people are giving him a lot of grief for the PMcM goal but I thought he did well under the high ball all day. Looking back at that incident, Hennelly had just taken an age to tie his bootlace, most likely a tactic to slow the game down with Mayo 3 ahead. He then came under pressure from the ref for doing that and didn't have the nerve to maintain the tactic. Having said all that, it was a virtually unstoppable sort of shot from point-blank range, it was a split-second thing once Brogan made the right connection. I actually thought it was a deliberate ploy in response to all the goal chances we have missed from just that sort of chance that Fenton had! I wish I could look back on such happy recent football memories!!!
|
|
fitz
Fanatical Member
Red sky at night get off my land
Posts: 1,719
|
Post by fitz on Dec 26, 2015 18:45:51 GMT
Looking back at that incident, Hennelly had just taken an age to tie his bootlace, most likely a tactic to slow the game down with Mayo 3 ahead. He then came under pressure from the ref for doing that and didn't have the nerve to maintain the tactic. Having said all that, it was a virtually unstoppable sort of shot from point-blank range, it was a split-second thing once Brogan made the right connection. I actually thought it was a deliberate ploy in response to all the goal chances we have missed from just that sort of chance that Fenton had! I wish I could look back on such happy recent football memories!!! The new year is all but upon us, wet the cloth and prepare the slate! We'll crack on...
|
|