QuoteWas there a court case today? Anyone know how it went?
Its like when someone objects to the IDF buldozing Palestinian settlements they are anti-semites.
TO TELL THE TRUTH IS REVOLUTIONARY
The ONLY foot.ie user with a type of logic named after them!
All of this has happened before. All of it will happen again.
Was there a court case today? Anyone know how it went?
According to the Rovers forum the case was heard but the Judge has reserved judgment. The verdict will be known before Easter.
#NeverStopNotGivingUp
Originally Posted by BohsPartisan
Are we giving out prizes for most irrelevant posts
I think we should have a debate about which is better - Linfield or Derry City...
SIGNATURESCOPE
Nail on head.
Only one sport has rules that enforce it.
End of discussion.
Which part of the text is troubling you? Or are you just invoking a bogeyman?
Without wanting to speak for Sam Savic, its the fact that it came out of the same book of rules as Rule 27, the only difference being thats rule 42 has since been given a new spin by the new improved non-bigoted, we really didn't spread glass on soccer pitches GAA. Now rule 42 is no longer in place for bigoted reasons, but simply to protect the GAA's competitive position.....
Purlease
Leopard, spots etc.
So the reason why it's bad that there's a rule that says GAA property and grounds are for GAA games and events or other games and events sanctioned by the Central Council, with a note that details the Association's volte face sanctioning of non-GAA games in Croke Park, is because a leopard can never change its spots? Curious.Without wanting to speak for Sam Savic, its the fact that it came out of the same book of rules as Rule 27, the only difference being thats rule 42 has since been given a new spin by the new improved non-bigoted, we really didn't spread glass on soccer pitches GAA. Now rule 42 is no longer in place for bigoted reasons, but simply to protect the GAA's competitive position.....
Purlease
Leopard, spots etc.
The leopard didn't change its spots.
Its saw that there was an opportunity to make a ****load of money so it temporarily covered its spots with stripes. Still spots underneath though.
You haven't addressed the point re rule 42, its an inherently anti-soccer and rugby rule, as it when rule 27 sat beside it.
BTW other sports were played in Croker (boxing and American football) without any kerfuffle.
The IRFU and the FAI have made inquiries about playing in Croker a total of once. They were told that they couldn't play in Croker a total of no times. They have a 100% success rate. Kerfuffle, how are you!
Boxing and American football matches were presumably organized on a similar "ask the GAA" basis. As provided for in Rule 42, which as far as I know actually predated Rule 27.
Speaking of which: did the leopard not change its spots with the scrapping of Rule 27? And Rule 21?
Spots aside, is it reasonable to demand that a rule that has been gone for almost forty years inform our modern interpretation of the current Rule 42 (44)? If it is inherently anti-soccer/rugby then surely it should stand up for itself to this very day. It doesn't, though; the explanatory note it currently sports explicitly details Central Council's sanctioning of Lansdowne-Road games in Croke Park. After that temporary period (
Is it reasonable to regard a group's status as "bigots" to be non-negotiable, no grounds for appeal, no chance of parole, no action deemed worthy? Or is it just handy? Is the glass still on them pitches?
No but there's a pitch in Tallaght sitting needlessly idle for other reasons.
I thought this thread was supposed to be about what TD (as a front for the GAA as clearly demonstrated in Court yesterday ) are attempting to do.
What summed up for me the 'kill them at birth' attitude of the GAA was very clearly outlined in Court yesterday by the Rovers barrister. He outlined in detail how that the Minister had advised the SDCC that if they intended revamping the stadium site to cater for GAA games then no money would be available from the Dept of Sport because such a change would ratchet up the overall cost of the developement and because the Minister felt that eventually the stadium would be home to 2 LOI clubs.
So thus the GAA/TD being aware that if they are sucessful in having the decision overturned to allow for GAA games, they are also aware that such a change would mean that no staduim would be built.... and whilst the barrister didn't say it in an explicit manner , what was very clear to all in the courtroom yesterday is the fact that the GAA/TD case is nothing but a vindictive attempt by the GAA/TD to stop Rovers and indeed any other LOI club from becoming part of the community in Tallaght...
That is what this case is really about...and yes it can be couched as due process and the right (which I support) of the GAA/TD to avail of the law..... however IMO the GAA/TD are using the democratic process in a perverse way to support their own dubious agenda.....
The Rovers legal team are reported as saying (not implying) on the first day that they believed Thomas Davis and the other clubs are being used by the GAA to try and secure a kind of a Southside Parnell Park.
If it's such fact, why did they not just attack the GAA's "bigotry" in court and get it all out in the open? I would have thought that a competent legal team would be well able to prove something as blindingly obvious as "pure bigotry", or at least state directly that it was the reason for the GAA's case. If an assault is racially motivated, for example, the prosecution tend to bring it up in court.
I want to say again that I think Rovers should win the current case, but where would the bigotry be if O'Donoghue had have sanctioned the extra cash for Tallaght/SDCC's proposed new stadium? Would that not have been the opposite of bigotry?
The reason it was not said is because the case will be decided on a very narrow technical issue... thus it would of being wrong of our legal team to of gone on the record and accusing the GAA of bigotry etc ... that wouldn't of cut the mustard with the judge as that is not the issue he is being asked to ajudicate on... however that point was clearly demostrated in a more subtle manner as outlined earlier..... so on one hand we got accross what I'd describe as the "heart and minds " argiement but more importantly our barrister also demonstrated in a very clear manner the very good reasons as to why TD are not entitled to a Judicial Review .... the judge will now mull over the arguements from both sides and come back with a his decision sometime before Easter.
Probably not strictly relevant to the case in hand, but will the recent investment in Pats have any effect on the building of the stadium? Now that the Minister/FAI can't bully Pats into leaving Richmond, their plans need to change anyway. If Shels lose their D1 license, there won't be any soccer club left to share with, making Tallaght an exclusive SRFC stadium again. Will this alter Government policy, especially if a new sports minister and possibly a new party is in charge?
SIGNATURESCOPE
Its Shels.....
But if there is no Shels...
Why should our hard-earned taxes fund a stadium for a Leinster Senior League team...?
SIGNATURESCOPE
There Will Always Be A Shels
as i've said earlier i'm not as up to date on this issue as some on here. however, in my opinion i think that TD want to prevent SRFC from locating in Tallaght as they feel it may attract all of the youngsters away from the GAA. do i agree with this stance - absolutely not. i think it is a narrow minded view and that there is sufficient population for both codes and clubs to flurish.
my main gripe on here is the attitude toward the GAA in general where a big brush has covered all and sundry involved with the association and painted them as bigots. granted the association has not been the most progressive through it's history but this has to be put in context with the times and and in fairness it has made massive strides in recent years. the abolition of the security forces ban, ban on players playing foreign codes and opening of croker are big strides when put in front of the historical backdrop of the organisation. you have to remember what the organisation was origanally formed to do and stood for since it's inception. to retain and promote uniquely irish sports. it is battling with itself on these more liberal issues and thankfully, in the main, common sense has prevailed. it is a bit like the republican movement where progressive thinking has replaced the hardline of the older members.
also i feel that the GAA is as important an organisation as any on this island. we are in total danger of losing of national idenity. we are rapidily becoming as british as the brits themselves. our media, choice of TV programmes, favourite football teams, attitude of our youth, places we shop....etc. the GAA provides something that is uniquely irish and for that we should be grateful.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks