Fair Play to Ye Lads

[Ruairi]

If he thought it was a pen he'd have been all over the ref.

no he wouldn't.

i've never EVER seen John argue a decision with an officail at any game at any time. he's just not that type of player. if it doesn't go his way he just shrugs it off and gets on with it

[joe]

the fact that he didn't appeal one bit to the referee after the tackle, he just got up and walked away. If he thought it was a pen he'd have been all over the ref.

maybe you're used to seeing that at Tolka Park, and we've seen it too at the Cross on at least one memorable ocassion when a certain visiting captain pushed the referee*, but it's not exactly what you'd consider good sportsmanship now is it?

*of course the punishment on that ocassion was a suspension for the referee rather than the player

[Fair_play_boy]

Oh and a blind man on a galloping horse could have seen it wasn't a penalty. Apparently O'Flynn admitted as much afterwards.

When did he say this? (-Razor)

After the match to Pat Fenlon.

And you believe Fenlon? (-Razor)

You think Fenlon would come out after the match and publicaly state that O'Flynn said it wasn't a penalty if that wasn't true . . .

Slash/ED, what do you mean that Fenlon came out with it publicly? Where was it printed or broadcast?

[Slash/ED]

Slash/ED, what do you mean that Fenlon came out with it publicly? Where was it printed or broadcast?

He said it in an interview on Newstalk 106 I think it was.

[Fair_play_boy]

He said it in an interview on Newstalk 106 I think it was.

I wonder if Flynnie even knows that. And I agree with the post above about the guy not starting the appeals procedure. He does not go in for that.

[razor]

You think Fenlon would come out after the match and publicaly state that O'Flynn said it wasn't a penalty if that wasn't true, knowing full well O'Flynn would go straight to the media .

The media you referred to is a dublin radio station,(And you're not even sure of that) O'Flynn would never have heard his interview, so there'd be no chance of a come back on what he said whether it was true or not.

Note the lack of denial on O'Flynns part and also, as TV3 even pointed out, the fact that he didn't appeal one bit to the referee after the tackle, he just got up and walked away. If he thought it was a pen he'd have been all over the ref.

We have as of yet no definitive proof that O'Flynn denied it was a penalty.
And sure Cork men know better than to argue when playing a dublin team in dublin with a dublin ref, years of conditioning.

[Slash/ED]

The media you referred to is a dublin radio station,(And you're not even sure of that) O'Flynn would never have heard his interview, so there'd be no chance of a come back on what he said whether it was true or not.

It was the night of the match, and O'Flynn was in Dublin. He was as likely to hear it as anyone, so there's no way Fenlon would just lie on air when he could be contradicted so easily and look like a fool. Why would Fenlon bother lying, the match is over, he could have said he felt it was a blatant penalty himself for all the good it would do, it wasn't something worth lying about espically when he could be contradicted so easily.

But don't let your own strikers admission it wasn't a penalty get in the way of moral outrage and conspiracy theorys about Dublin refs and all that.

[Éanna]

two points:
1. that kind of penalty is only ever given to a home team. if it was at the cross, we might have got it. o'flynn didn't appeal and being honest, I think it was a bit on the dubious side myself.
2. o'flynn never appeals these kind of things, nor do quite a few other players in our side. george is the only one who really argues with refs. maybe our players should stand up to refs a bit more as it works for shels.

[patsh]

I have to say that its hilarious all this "Nuttsy wouldn't lie" sh*te.
Fenlon turned into some kind of saint, has he?
More to the point would be the question: Would Nuttsy ever tell the truth?

[Slash/ED]

I have to say that its hilarious all this "Nuttsy wouldn't lie" sh*te.
Fenlon turned into some kind of saint, has he?
More to the point would be the question: Would Nuttsy ever tell the truth?

You're missing the point for a change.

I didn't say he wouldn't lie I said he wouldn't lie when he could so easily be proved wrong by O'Flynn calling his bluff, if it was a lie. It'd be a stupid risk to take over something with no relevence to anything.

[patsh]

You're missing the point for a change.

I didn't say he wouldn't lie I said he wouldn't lie when he could so easily be proved wrong by O'Flynn calling his bluff, if it was a lie. It'd be a stupid risk to take over something with no relevence to anything.

Your "theory" assumes John O'Flynn had access to a radio/website on Friday night and was tuned into Newstalk, that Nuttsy thought about the consequences of John O'Flynn hearing him and denying he said any such thing, (there are NO consequences, except that $hels fans believe Nuttsy, everyone else doesn't).
1 main problem with your theory.
The idea that Nuttsy could rustle up the brain power to think all of this out for himself in a short space of time.

Conclusion: It was a penalty, John O'Flyn probably said nothing, and Nuttsy will say anything to re-inforce his point. (Much like most managers).

You don't believe it was a penalty, you comfort yourself that your manager didn't think so either, and the Ref agreed with you.

So what?

[Fair_play_boy]

It was the night of the match, and O'Flynn was in Dublin. He was as likely to hear it as anyone . . .

Yeah I can see Flynnie sitting down to his bowl of post-match pasta, tuning in especially . . . . And I can see Pat Fenlon thinking that one through too.