Shamrock Rovers Tallaght

[BohDiddley]

Both terms are essentially correct though and Thomas Davis's submission to the court this morning proves it. Lots of blather about culture and language. Apparently we're (football) inferior Irishmen. Bigots is too kind a word.

KOH

Looking forward to the transcripts on that!
As for hoping that the best team of lawyers wins, what a load of utter nonsense!

[wws]

Wait Til They Play The "abortion" Trump Card!

[neville neville]

Good luck to all concerned and may the legal team who argue most successfully win; hopefully a mutually beneficial compromise can be reached in as sensible a fashion as possible, ideally involving a court order against the hysterical use of terms such as "bigots" and "vile organization" along the way.

I can't think of 2 better phrases to describe them than "bigots" and "vile organization"

[WeAreRovers]

Wait Til They Play The "abortion" Trump Card!

Is 'Trump' not a dirty word in Inchicore these days?

KOH

[galwayhoop]

hope all goes well for rovers today but is anyone prepared to give a brief synopisis of why thomas davis are insisting on sharing the ground with rovers.

please refrain from terms such as bigots, vile organisation...etc in answer. non-partisan reply if possible!

my take is:
offical line: that because it is financed by the county council that they feel it should be a municipal stadium, which incopropates gaelic games.
reality: GAA are freightened that youngsters in the area will choose soccer over gaelic football

[BohDiddley]

There's a very weird form of pre-emptive censorship going on here, and with more than one poster.
Are we afraid to contemplate the possibility that, beyond the huffing and puffing about legalities, there is simple bigotry?

[wws]

There's a very weird form of pre-emptive censorship going on here, and with more than one poster.
Are we afraid to contemplate the possibility that, beyond the huffing and puffing about legalities, there is simple bigotry?

huh???

explain

[CharlesThompson]

huh???

explain

I think he means that the GAA's stance on the stadium in Tallaght could purely be down to bigotry as a possibility as such.

[Erstwhile Bóz]

As for hoping that the best team of lawyers wins, what a load of utter nonsense!

"May the legal team who argue most successfully win" (in the eyes of whoever's presiding, of course). When things go to litigation instead of mediation that is essentially what you're relying on. Unfortunately this is what it boils down to now in this situation.

Rovers have a good case, they're probably in the right, and they should win through. The anti-GAA ballsology makes me almost not give a feck either way, though.

Saying that the GAA are "bigots" and referring to them as a "vile organization" is as pathetic as saying everybody who calls the GAA "bigots" is a "bigot". I can't see how such ridiculous language would attract support for Rovers' cause, either, except of course amongst the converted who are already fully aware of the bigotry and vileness of the GAA.

And Thomas Davis referred to football people as "inferior Irishmen" in their submission to-day, as well? How ill-advised! They must have crap lawyers; Rovers are laughing, so.

[John83]

Good luck to Rovers.

[WeAreRovers]

hope all goes well for rovers today but is anyone prepared to give a brief synopisis of why thomas davis are insisting on sharing the ground with rovers.

please refrain from terms such as bigots, vile organisation...etc in answer. non-partisan reply if possible!

my take is:
offical line: that because it is financed by the county council that they feel it should be a municipal stadium, which incopropates gaelic games.
reality: GAA are freightened that youngsters in the area will choose soccer over gaelic football

How many times does it have to be said - it is down to pure bigotry and fear. I've read TD's submission so I think I can answer better than those who haven't.

The legal part of TD's case is that the SDCC had no right to change their mind about the use of the stadium but the submission goes on and on about the GAA's place in the community being hindered by this and how subsequently the youth of Tallaght are being denied their natural rights. (Despite the fact that SDCC are more than willing to allow under-age GAA games in Tallaght.)

KOH

[BohDiddley]

huh???

explain

We keep being told that we mustn't mention the B-word. That doesn't make sense, when there is plenty of evidence, historically and in the present, that actions like this are likely to be motivated by bigotry.

[CharlesThompson]

We keep being told that we mustn't mention the B-word. That doesn't make sense, when there is plenty of evidence, historically and in the present, that actions like this are likely to be motivated by bigotry.

Do I win a prize?

[gspain]

The gist of their argument is that public money should not be given to a football club's ground without the ground being available for GAA too. In reality they just want to delay and kill the project and hope Rovers go to the wall.

As we all know the GAA who have trousered hundreds of millions of public money make all their grounds freely available to other sports. Then again they are also not inhabited by vile sectarian bigots.

Good luck Rovers.

[BohDiddley]

Do I win a prize?

Yes, you do, as such.

[paudie]

The legal part of TD's case is that the SDCC had no right to change their mind about the use of the stadium but the submission goes on and on about the GAA's place in the community being hindered by this and how subsequently the youth of Tallaght are being denied their natural rights.
KOH

When the SDCC change their mind?

Surely they just took over the ownership of a half built soccer stadium and decided to finish it

[WeAreRovers]

From our MB as posted by birthday boy EFFC, might help explain -

http://www.srfcultrasforum.com/forum...2965#post32965

the eamon fagan fanclub - "The council for TD put forward that they felt they had "reasonable" grounds for a judicial review on the following basis:

that SDCC had voted to change the use of the stadium to include the playing of GAA . Then the SDCC was informed by the office of the Minister that on the basis that such a change would involve not only the changing of the diameters of the playing pitch but also the destruction of the existing stand to cater for a larger pitch, the Minister was of the view that would not make sense and thus he was informing the SDCC that if they intended to proceed on the basis of extending the pitch etc then he would not sanction the funds. Thus the SDCC held another vote based on the letter from the Minister and voted to revert back to the original proposal ie a municipal stadium with Rovers as the anchor tenant.

It was when asked by the judge agreed by our and the SDCC council that the above was the substantial issue in question and it is on the above that the judge... not on the TD guff etc about culture etc....

I know I'm not objective but IMO the judge would be going down a very illogical road were he to decide that TD are entitled to a JD.... all the SDCC did was hold a vote, then receive a clear reason from the Minister that funds for very good reasons wouldnbe withheld and thus based on that fact the SDCC held another vote as is their entitlement and decided to revert back to their original position... ie they dealt with this in a democratic and fair manner

so I'm very optomistic."

KOH

[galwayhoop]

is there an expected outcome today

[hoopy]

Court adjourned until Tuesday

[BohsPartisan]

As we all know the GAA who have trousered hundreds of millions of public money

Or thonged maybe?

Its like the GAA is a poledancer and the taxpayer is a punter thats been hustled into a dodgy strip joint in Amsterdam. There's a big bouncer making us put Euro's into the dancer's smalls but the dance isn't very alluring at all.