Mrs Gill steps up to the plate

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

12/12/2006, 1:17 PM
Calcio Jack

Mrs Gill steps up to the plate

Once Mrs Kenny left for Scotland.... I thought we'd seen the back of the greatest whinger and moaner that the league has produced during my 33 years following the game.

Little did I know that Mrs Gill was standing in the wings.... to listen to him wage his one man campaign since the criteria were published has been a pain in the proverbial...but his comments yesterday about not been able to enjure any more and that he was considering whether he could continue... He IMO is nothing but a whinger/bully who is now acting like a spoilt brat... so hopefully he'll fulfill his threat and move on. Or at least maybe one of the Directors of Dundalk would do us all a favour and ask him to shut it or do they not have his mobile number since he recently changed it !!:D

So for the last time Gill: The criteria were agreed to by your own and all the other clubs, if you didn't like them then you should of walked.
12/12/2006, 1:20 PM
drummerboy

Heard Giller is being linked with the Shels job.
12/12/2006, 1:24 PM
mcgonigle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calcio Jack

do they not have his mobile number since he recently changed it !!:D

Says it all about your club really :rolleyes:
12/12/2006, 1:29 PM
NY Hoop

It gets better! Apparently in the Sun he's quoted: "I know we signed up but I feel we didn't have a full grasp of what it entailed"

Says it all about dundalk. Their chairman looks like he escaped from a zoo.

KOH
12/12/2006, 1:31 PM
Dodge

Agree he's a whinging ****. Big mates with Eamon Collins so look for them to link up at a club (possibly Shels)
12/12/2006, 1:32 PM
Dodge

Quote:

Originally Posted by NY Hoop

It gets better! Apparently in the Sun he's quoted: "I know we signed up but I feel we didn't have a full grasp of what it entailed"

Says it all about dundalk. Their chairman looks like he escaped from a zoo.

In fairness when they signed up for it wasn't their 2002 cup win and 10th place finish going to count?
12/12/2006, 1:33 PM
BrayUnknowns

Quote:

Originally Posted by NY Hoop

It gets better! Apparently in the Sun he's quoted: "I know we signed up but I feel we didn't have a full grasp of what it entailed"

Says it all about dundalk. Their chairman looks like he escaped from a zoo.

KOH

If Gill did say this then his club deserve to be where they are. It was in black and white and very very clear how it would work. If they didn't bother to read it and take the correct steps then the 1st division is the only place for them.
12/12/2006, 1:37 PM
NY Hoop

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dodge

Agree he's a whinging ****. Big mates with Eamon Collins so look for them to link up at a club (possibly Shels)

If they got Roddy in they could have the Kermit, Gonzo and Ernie show. Three of the biggest lumps of **** ever to appear on the Irish football scene.

KOH
12/12/2006, 1:45 PM
JW.

Gill and Collins as joint-managers. There's a thought to prompt a cringe
12/12/2006, 1:52 PM
pete

Quote:

Originally Posted by NY Hoop

It gets better! Apparently in the Sun he's quoted: "I know we signed up but I feel we didn't have a full grasp of what it entailed"

He probably wonders why they scored so lowely on the off the field ratings. 200 points deducted for being illiterate.

:rolleyes:

Looks like Tolka park could be his spirital home...
12/12/2006, 1:54 PM
wws

I've found Gill to be an affable sort in person
far removed from the persona he's portraying here (where he's just fighting his clubs corner - more power to him I say)
12/12/2006, 2:11 PM
holidaysong

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dodge

In fairness when they signed up for it wasn't their 2002 cup win and 10th place finish going to count?

That's correct. A lot of people on here seem to ignore that point.
12/12/2006, 2:20 PM
dcfcsteve

Quote:

Originally Posted by holidaysong

That's correct. A lot of people on here seem to ignore that point.

But it wouldn't have changed a thing, as you were so far behind Galway in the rankings anyway (54pts, I believe)..... :rolleyes:

It's therefore completely irrelevant and by no means picks any holes in the process, as you're misleadingly trying to suggest.
12/12/2006, 2:27 PM
BrayUnknowns

Quote:

Originally Posted by wws

I've found Gill to be an affable sort in person
far removed from the persona he's portraying here (where he's just fighting his clubs corner - more power to him I say)

"I know we signed up but I feel we didn't have a full grasp of what it entailed"
John Gill.

Disgraceful if true and if i were a Dundalk fan would want a full explanitation of what he meant, and if that they didn't fully grasp what was going to happen why didn't they seek advice.
12/12/2006, 2:28 PM
holidaysong

Quote:

Originally Posted by dcfcsteve

But it wouldn't have changed a thing, as you were so far behind Galway in the rankings anyway (54pts, I believe)..... :rolleyes:

It's therefore completely irrelevant and by no means picks any holes in the process, as you're misleadingly trying to suggest.

Although it may not have made a difference it shows how much thought the FAI put into the entire process when they originally decide to include a year when one of the teams they are assessing didn't even exist. They arbitrarily picked a year - 5 years. Then realised they had to change it to 4. What if it had been just one year previous? Then we would have gotten in. It is the whole arbitrary way that the FAI decided to pluck a number from the air and use it to decide the future of my club that I am annoyed about. Why stop at 5 years why not our record in the last 25years?
12/12/2006, 2:38 PM
londonhoop

Quote:

Originally Posted by NY Hoop

Their chairman looks like he escaped from a zoo.

KOH

:D :D :D

Potm
12/12/2006, 2:54 PM
Terry

Quote:

Originally Posted by holidaysong

Although it may not have made a difference it shows how much thought the FAI put into the entire process when they originally decide to include a year when one of the teams they are assessing didn't even exist. They arbitrarily picked a year - 5 years. Then realised they had to change it to 4. What if it had been just one year previous? Then we would have gotten in. It is the whole arbitrary way that the FAI decided to pluck a number from the air and use it to decide the future of my club that I am annoyed about. Why stop at 5 years why not our record in the last 25years?

You explain yourself why they moved it from 5 years to 4 years and then at the end ask why wasnt it moved from 5 years to 25 years???????
12/12/2006, 2:57 PM
jebus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terry

You explain yourself why they moved it from 5 years to 4 years and then at the end ask why wasnt it moved from 5 years to 25 years???????

I think the tone of his post was lost on you with that one Terry
12/12/2006, 2:59 PM
Terry

I think your right there Jebus ! but I am beginning to wonder what the Dundalk club and supporters were thinking before the annoucements? Did everybody understand the requirements??
12/12/2006, 3:12 PM
dcfcsteve

Quote:

Originally Posted by holidaysong

Although it may not have made a difference it shows how much thought the FAI put into the entire process when they originally decide to include a year when one of the teams they are assessing didn't even exist. They arbitrarily picked a year - 5 years. Then realised they had to change it to 4. What if it had been just one year previous? Then we would have gotten in. It is the whole arbitrary way that the FAI decided to pluck a number from the air and use it to decide the future of my club that I am annoyed about. Why stop at 5 years why not our record in the last 25years?

Well they had to pick some feckin number, didn't they....? :rolleyes:

It's obvious why neitehr 1 year nor 25yrs would've worked. 5 years feels about right - long eough to give a medium-term overview of performance (hence avoiding flashes-in-the-pan), but not so long that the stats are out-dated. The EL has changed dramatically since the start of the millennium, so yuou really couldn't have justified any longer than 5 years ago for such an analysis.

The idea of using 5 years was hampered by the disappearance of a team, which prevented that time-scale offering a level playing field. Yes - the FAI should've twigged this earlier, but the circumstances whereby they couldn't use a 5 yr timescale was not their fault. They obviously couldn't pick any longer a time-line, as it would still have been not comparing like with like, so they did the sensible thing and opted for 4 years. Long enough to give a medium-term overview - not long enough to start being irrelevant or involve periods when clubs didn't exist. Given that they had to have SOME form of cut-off point, i can't see what fairer period they could have chosen, and challenge you to tell me one with a sensible argement to back it up.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page