|
Excellent win by Limerick yesterday against a very committed and a well prepared Waterford team. Limerick are a powerful and thoroughly well drilled team who are serious hit favourites for the All Ireland. To be honest I was very surprised at John Kiely yesterday making an issue of his extended squad members not having access to the venue. I think that we are very lucky that GAA inter county games are considered as 'elite' in that players go back to work this morning unlike the rugby panels and it must be really difficult for our inter county players to maintain a small cohort of social interactions and so be free of covid. The players are a great credit to themselves and to their counties.
Every day we are being asked to socially distance, wash our hands etc and to be honest having an added 10 players in the stand with their actual substitutes is not going with the general advice to keep our social contacts down to the minimum. I accept that these players may want to be there but so do 45,000 others from both counties... I think a lot of sacrifices are being made every day and it comes across to me as being a small bit petty in the current pandemic conditions.
carlowman (Carlow) - Posts: 1521 - 16/11/2020 12:06:34
2309959
Link
0
|
|
Replying To clooney: " Replying To KillingFields: "Firstly congrats to Limerick today on another Munster title...what a team and what a manager they have.
Just after a big final win, John backs his squad players unable to attend the game. He is 100% right. All panel members should be allowed to attend. It's ridiculous. Load of media there when half them aren't needed.
A huge stadium and neither team can bring more than the allocated numbers which means players training all year miss out. We had the same ridiculous situation in club games this year, lads missing out outside the match day 24.
Time for government to address this.
yew_tree (Mayo) - Posts: 10298 - 15/11/2020 21:59:04The government have far more important things to address this nonsense.
Where do you stop if you say let all players into the ground? How are half of the media not needed?
It isnt ridiculous at all.
Well said Yew tree. It's disgraceful the way panel members are being treated when they allow ex players into the matches on the pretence of being analysts and writing articles for newspapers. John Kiely is correct. I touched this on a different post. Allow panel members in and stop the rest. I know you need a commentator and Co commentator etc and analysts but those anaylists that are not needed on the day and those players who get big money to write newspaper columns should nt be allowed in to the detriment of the players. It's wrong. So my message for these boys who are getting in by default is Stay At Home and watch in on the telly and let the people that really matter in.
CiarraiMick (Dublin) - Posts: 468 - 15/11/2020 22:16:36What analysts are not needed on the day?
I can see the point John Kiely is making, but it didn't come across well. A bigger question for me is: do counties really need panels of 36?? It sounds completely excessive to be - a huge additional expense, and ties up a number of players who are just being used to make up numbers. Realistically at least 6 of John's 10 who were "left at home" have absolutely no chance of getting any game time in the championship. In a normal season, those players would be much better off with their clubs.
football first (None) - Posts: 1175 - 16/11/2020 08:38:18 How many would you drop from a squad?" A huge stadium should easily cater for everybody wrong to blame Journalists though they add hugely to those Matches We are all delighted to read next day about the matches is say Kiely diden't mean a dig at reporters but it came across somehow in the wrong context."
What would you see as minimum needed to allow a game take place and max that should be allowed into a game in these times?
KillingFields (Limerick) - Posts: 1636 - 16/11/2020 12:52:39
2310005
Link
0
|
|
Didn't even have the manners to listen to him...changed the channel as soon as Waterford lost.
katser (Galway) - Posts: 1058 - 16/11/2020 13:55:52
2310054
Link
0
|
|
This was simply about allowing all the players who give their time, bodies, family separation night after night week after week to provide your entertainment. How ungracious it is to begrudge them a seat at the game. It is not about opening it up and nonsensically questions about how many should be allowed in as we all know and agree that restrictions are required. It is about mitigating risk and if anyone can put a number factor to this by allowing these players in, well separated, please do and I will back off also. The question about how many should be on a panel to begin with is a different argument and certainly no bearing on these players who are now part and turning up to participate. I guess one of the side effects of success for John Kiely is some (on here also) will take a microscope to what he says to find a flaw or pull him down a bit. Cody probably can testify to that also. Look out Liam Sheedy and Liam Cahill.
Canuck (Waterford) - Posts: 979 - 16/11/2020 14:05:54
2310064
Link
1
|
|
This was simply about allowing all the players who give their time, bodies, family separation night after night week after week to provide your entertainment. How ungracious it is to begrudge them a seat at the game. It is not about opening it up and nonsensically questions about how many should be allowed in as we all know and agree that restrictions are required. It is about mitigating risk and if anyone can put a number factor to this by allowing these players in, well separated, please do and I will back off also. The question about how many should be on a panel to begin with is a different argument and certainly no bearing on these players who are now part and turning up to participate. I guess one of the side effects of success for John Kiely is some (on here also) will take a microscope to what he says to find a flaw or pull him down a bit. Cody probably can testify to that also. Look out Liam Sheedy and Liam Cahill.
Canuck (Waterford) - Posts: 943 - 16/11/2020 14:05:54 There had to be a limit to who could physically attend the games.
Many counties regularly have numbers well in excess of the squad they name on matchday. If theyre not in match day squad and we are limiting needless travel etc then they dont need to attend. Its very simple.
KillingFields (Limerick) - Posts: 1636 - 16/11/2020 16:10:52
2310182
Link
0
|
|
Replying To KillingFields: "This was simply about allowing all the players who give their time, bodies, family separation night after night week after week to provide your entertainment. How ungracious it is to begrudge them a seat at the game. It is not about opening it up and nonsensically questions about how many should be allowed in as we all know and agree that restrictions are required. It is about mitigating risk and if anyone can put a number factor to this by allowing these players in, well separated, please do and I will back off also. The question about how many should be on a panel to begin with is a different argument and certainly no bearing on these players who are now part and turning up to participate. I guess one of the side effects of success for John Kiely is some (on here also) will take a microscope to what he says to find a flaw or pull him down a bit. Cody probably can testify to that also. Look out Liam Sheedy and Liam Cahill.
Canuck (Waterford) - Posts: 943 - 16/11/2020 14:05:54 There had to be a limit to who could physically attend the games.
Many counties regularly have numbers well in excess of the squad they name on matchday. If theyre not in match day squad and we are limiting needless travel etc then they dont need to attend. Its very simple." It its very simple. We are talking about the players. Without them the media t.v. etc. are not required at all. You are always tossing in red herrings into every conversation. So you want them excluded because they were not lucky enough to make the match day squad inspite of their contribution and sacrifice. Like kick them twice. If someone or you can quantified the risk that these players are then leave them at home but while doing that turn over all the other rocks to see who else might be adding risk.
Canuck (Waterford) - Posts: 979 - 16/11/2020 18:35:49
2310284
Link
0
|
|
Replying To KillingFields: "Firstly congrats to Limerick today on another Munster title...what a team and what a manager they have.
Just after a big final win, John backs his squad players unable to attend the game. He is 100% right. All panel members should be allowed to attend. It's ridiculous. Load of media there when half them aren't needed.
A huge stadium and neither team can bring more than the allocated numbers which means players training all year miss out. We had the same ridiculous situation in club games this year, lads missing out outside the match day 24.
Time for government to address this.
yew_tree (Mayo) - Posts: 10298 - 15/11/2020 21:59:04The government have far more important things to address this nonsense.
Where do you stop if you say let all players into the ground? How are half of the media not needed?
It isnt ridiculous at all.
Well said Yew tree. It's disgraceful the way panel members are being treated when they allow ex players into the matches on the pretence of being analysts and writing articles for newspapers. John Kiely is correct. I touched this on a different post. Allow panel members in and stop the rest. I know you need a commentator and Co commentator etc and analysts but those anaylists that are not needed on the day and those players who get big money to write newspaper columns should nt be allowed in to the detriment of the players. It's wrong. So my message for these boys who are getting in by default is Stay At Home and watch in on the telly and let the people that really matter in.
CiarraiMick (Dublin) - Posts: 468 - 15/11/2020 22:16:36What analysts are not needed on the day?
I can see the point John Kiely is making, but it didn't come across well. A bigger question for me is: do counties really need panels of 36?? It sounds completely excessive to be - a huge additional expense, and ties up a number of players who are just being used to make up numbers. Realistically at least 6 of John's 10 who were "left at home" have absolutely no chance of getting any game time in the championship. In a normal season, those players would be much better off with their clubs.
football first (None) - Posts: 1175 - 16/11/2020 08:38:18 How many would you drop from a squad?" I could have bet you'd be on disagreeing...going by the reactions here your in the small minority in your view.
Bottom line is the government set the guidelines. 20 extra lads (10 from each panel) would have made no difference to being "safer" in the huge 50k Gaelic Grounds.
It is totally wrong if lads on the panel are left sitting at home watching this years finals while their team mates play in Croke Park.
yew_tree (Mayo) - Posts: 10339 - 16/11/2020 18:56:50
2310299
Link
2
|
|
Replying To Canuck: " Replying To KillingFields: "This was simply about allowing all the players who give their time, bodies, family separation night after night week after week to provide your entertainment. How ungracious it is to begrudge them a seat at the game. It is not about opening it up and nonsensically questions about how many should be allowed in as we all know and agree that restrictions are required. It is about mitigating risk and if anyone can put a number factor to this by allowing these players in, well separated, please do and I will back off also. The question about how many should be on a panel to begin with is a different argument and certainly no bearing on these players who are now part and turning up to participate. I guess one of the side effects of success for John Kiely is some (on here also) will take a microscope to what he says to find a flaw or pull him down a bit. Cody probably can testify to that also. Look out Liam Sheedy and Liam Cahill.
Canuck (Waterford) - Posts: 943 - 16/11/2020 14:05:54 There had to be a limit to who could physically attend the games.
Many counties regularly have numbers well in excess of the squad they name on matchday. If theyre not in match day squad and we are limiting needless travel etc then they dont need to attend. Its very simple." It its very simple. We are talking about the players. Without them the media t.v. etc. are not required at all. You are always tossing in red herrings into every conversation. So you want them excluded because they were not lucky enough to make the match day squad inspite of their contribution and sacrifice. Like kick them twice. If someone or you can quantified the risk that these players are then leave them at home but while doing that turn over all the other rocks to see who else might be adding risk."
Hell professional players not in squads arent attending games when not named in match day squads and thats their actual job and the teams level of success in a game/season can affect their future work status.
it isnt a red herring and they arent being kicked/pushed back because they cant attend the game.
KillingFields (Limerick) - Posts: 1636 - 16/11/2020 19:01:14
2310302
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Canuck: " Replying To KillingFields: "This was simply about allowing all the players who give their time, bodies, family separation night after night week after week to provide your entertainment. How ungracious it is to begrudge them a seat at the game. It is not about opening it up and nonsensically questions about how many should be allowed in as we all know and agree that restrictions are required. It is about mitigating risk and if anyone can put a number factor to this by allowing these players in, well separated, please do and I will back off also. The question about how many should be on a panel to begin with is a different argument and certainly no bearing on these players who are now part and turning up to participate. I guess one of the side effects of success for John Kiely is some (on here also) will take a microscope to what he says to find a flaw or pull him down a bit. Cody probably can testify to that also. Look out Liam Sheedy and Liam Cahill.
Canuck (Waterford) - Posts: 943 - 16/11/2020 14:05:54 There had to be a limit to who could physically attend the games.
Many counties regularly have numbers well in excess of the squad they name on matchday. If theyre not in match day squad and we are limiting needless travel etc then they dont need to attend. Its very simple." It its very simple. We are talking about the players. Without them the media t.v. etc. are not required at all. You are always tossing in red herrings into every conversation. So you want them excluded because they were not lucky enough to make the match day squad inspite of their contribution and sacrifice. Like kick them twice. If someone or you can quantified the risk that these players are then leave them at home but while doing that turn over all the other rocks to see who else might be adding risk."
Hell professional players not in squads arent attending games when not named in match day squads and thats their actual job and the teams level of success in a game/season can affect their future work status.
it isnt a red herring and they arent being kicked/pushed back because they cant attend the game.
KillingFields (Limerick) - Posts: 1636 - 16/11/2020 19:01:17
2310303
Link
0
|
|
Killingfields,I think kiely has made a very vali point,it was also made by Meath manager..people are getting to see games and teams which is great,however anyone following cork hurlers won't have seen their team unless they have sky..3 games played none on terrestial tv..not everyone has sky and for all we know a possibility players may not have sky and are missing the chance to watch their team mates..
CTGAA10 (Limerick) - Posts: 1045 - 16/11/2020 20:06:08
2310344
Link
2
|
|
Replying To CTGAA10: "Killingfields,I think kiely has made a very vali point,it was also made by Meath manager..people are getting to see games and teams which is great,however anyone following cork hurlers won't have seen their team unless they have sky..3 games played none on terrestial tv..not everyone has sky and for all we know a possibility players may not have sky and are missing the chance to watch their team mates.." You dont have to have a sky subscription to watch sky. Many ways to watch sky without paying for it.
We need to minimise movements and stop unnecessary journeys. If you are not in matchday squad then travelling to a game is completely unnecessary.
KillingFields (Limerick) - Posts: 1636 - 16/11/2020 20:34:00
2310369
Link
0
|
|
Replying To KillingFields: " Replying To Canuck: "[quote=KillingFields: "This was simply about allowing all the players who give their time, bodies, family separation night after night week after week to provide your entertainment. How ungracious it is to begrudge them a seat at the game. It is not about opening it up and nonsensically questions about how many should be allowed in as we all know and agree that restrictions are required. It is about mitigating risk and if anyone can put a number factor to this by allowing these players in, well separated, please do and I will back off also. The question about how many should be on a panel to begin with is a different argument and certainly no bearing on these players who are now part and turning up to participate. I guess one of the side effects of success for John Kiely is some (on here also) will take a microscope to what he says to find a flaw or pull him down a bit. Cody probably can testify to that also. Look out Liam Sheedy and Liam Cahill.
Canuck (Waterford) - Posts: 943 - 16/11/2020 14:05:54 There had to be a limit to who could physically attend the games.
Many counties regularly have numbers well in excess of the squad they name on matchday. If theyre not in match day squad and we are limiting needless travel etc then they dont need to attend. Its very simple." It its very simple. We are talking about the players. Without them the media t.v. etc. are not required at all. You are always tossing in red herrings into every conversation. So you want them excluded because they were not lucky enough to make the match day squad inspite of their contribution and sacrifice. Like kick them twice. If someone or you can quantified the risk that these players are then leave them at home but while doing that turn over all the other rocks to see who else might be adding risk."
Hell professional players not in squads arent attending games when not named in match day squads and thats their actual job and the teams level of success in a game/season can affect their future work status.
it isnt a red herring and they arent being kicked/pushed back because they cant attend the game."]Professional players are getting paid. It is their job. GAA is voluntary ridiculous comparison. Terrible not to let a lad training all the time not experience winning or loosing with his team. Makes no sense for any angle.
gatha (Kilkenny) - Posts: 183 - 16/11/2020 20:53:34
2310390
Link
0
|
|
And before you know it every lad who had a trial is in the ground.
StoreysTash (Wexford) - Posts: 864 - 16/11/2020 20:55:43
2310394
Link
0
|
|
Replying To KillingFields: " Replying To Canuck: "[quote=KillingFields: "This was simply about allowing all the players who give their time, bodies, family separation night after night week after week to provide your entertainment. How ungracious it is to begrudge them a seat at the game. It is not about opening it up and nonsensically questions about how many should be allowed in as we all know and agree that restrictions are required. It is about mitigating risk and if anyone can put a number factor to this by allowing these players in, well separated, please do and I will back off also. The question about how many should be on a panel to begin with is a different argument and certainly no bearing on these players who are now part and turning up to participate. I guess one of the side effects of success for John Kiely is some (on here also) will take a microscope to what he says to find a flaw or pull him down a bit. Cody probably can testify to that also. Look out Liam Sheedy and Liam Cahill.
Canuck (Waterford) - Posts: 943 - 16/11/2020 14:05:54 There had to be a limit to who could physically attend the games.
Many counties regularly have numbers well in excess of the squad they name on matchday. If theyre not in match day squad and we are limiting needless travel etc then they dont need to attend. Its very simple." It its very simple. We are talking about the players. Without them the media t.v. etc. are not required at all. You are always tossing in red herrings into every conversation. So you want them excluded because they were not lucky enough to make the match day squad inspite of their contribution and sacrifice. Like kick them twice. If someone or you can quantified the risk that these players are then leave them at home but while doing that turn over all the other rocks to see who else might be adding risk."
Hell professional players not in squads arent attending games when not named in match day squads and thats their actual job and the teams level of success in a game/season can affect their future work status.
it isnt a red herring and they arent being kicked/pushed back because they cant attend the game."]Yes the media are important to transmit the ganesbut people who are not working are left in and players are not. Ex players that write newspaper columns should not be left in ahead of panel members. Also do you need all the reporters. Can they not write a report on the game from TV.the government made the rules but many are bending the rules. For example the Sunday fame pundits do Not need to attend the fame unless they are needed for the live programme.
CiarraiMick (Dublin) - Posts: 630 - 16/11/2020 21:11:26
2310404
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Canuck: "Unreasonable restrictions is what gets people's back up and sceptical of ones that are totally necessary. They will all be at training tuesday night. Are the droplets going to go from one side of Thurles to the other. If so we are all f--ked." Any of the grounds the games have been played in this year were big enough for all the squad members to be there and be sitting 10 metres apart never mind 2 metres.
Viking66 (Wexford) - Posts: 1024 - 16/11/2020 21:14:59
2310407
Link
0
|
|
Replying To StoreysTash: "And before you know it every lad who had a trial is in the ground." Ha ha, I remember back when 200 were allowed in the grounds at one game we had about 400 stewards in yellow vests and everyone huddled together in the stands ,Why is in Ireland that we always want the rules changed? We are lucky that matches are going ahead at all.
ecad123 (Galway) - Posts: 68 - 16/11/2020 21:32:21
2310418
Link
0
|
|
Professional players are getting paid. It is their job. GAA is voluntary ridiculous comparison. Terrible not to let a lad training all the time not experience winning or loosing with his team. Makes no sense for any angle.
gatha (Kilkenny) - Posts: 158 - 16/11/2020 20:53:34How is it a ridiculous comparison? That its their job means they even more should be allowed in as theyre employees and it isnt terrible. Its just part and parcel of life in a time where thousands have died.
If you are not needed to let game take place then you dont travel
Yes the media are important to transmit the ganesbut people who are not working are left in and players are not. Ex players that write newspaper columns should not be left in ahead of panel members. Also do you need all the reporters. Can they not write a report on the game from TV.the government made the rules but many are bending the rules. For example the Sunday fame pundits do Not need to attend the fame unless they are needed for the live programme.
CiarraiMick (Dublin) - Posts: 481 - 16/11/2020 21:11:26 The ex players are journalists and the column writers get their column material from attending games in person. they cant write them without being at games in person.
Each reporter is for a different organisation.
By all means have 26 players of a squad and 1/2 extra in case a players pulls up injured in warm up to allow you have a full bench but if you say let all these players in where do you stop? Who else do you let in?
Its fair to everyone. You are named in squad you can attend. If not you watch at home as if not involved in the game you are making a journey that isnt necessary in a time when we should be restricting movements
KillingFields (Limerick) - Posts: 1636 - 16/11/2020 22:19:37
2310438
Link
0
|
|
Replying To KillingFields: "Professional players are getting paid. It is their job. GAA is voluntary ridiculous comparison. Terrible not to let a lad training all the time not experience winning or loosing with his team. Makes no sense for any angle.
gatha (Kilkenny) - Posts: 158 - 16/11/2020 20:53:34How is it a ridiculous comparison? That its their job means they even more should be allowed in as theyre employees and it isnt terrible. Its just part and parcel of life in a time where thousands have died.
If you are not needed to let game take place then you dont travel
Yes the media are important to transmit the ganesbut people who are not working are left in and players are not. Ex players that write newspaper columns should not be left in ahead of panel members. Also do you need all the reporters. Can they not write a report on the game from TV.the government made the rules but many are bending the rules. For example the Sunday fame pundits do Not need to attend the fame unless they are needed for the live programme.
CiarraiMick (Dublin) - Posts: 481 - 16/11/2020 21:11:26 The ex players are journalists and the column writers get their column material from attending games in person. they cant write them without being at games in person.
Each reporter is for a different organisation.
By all means have 26 players of a squad and 1/2 extra in case a players pulls up injured in warm up to allow you have a full bench but if you say let all these players in where do you stop? Who else do you let in?
Its fair to everyone. You are named in squad you can attend. If not you watch at home as if not involved in the game you are making a journey that isnt necessary in a time when we should be restricting movements" Balcony. Many of these ex players are not reporters. They just write weekly columns and they definitely do not need to be at the games. As a matter of fact they write on maybe 2 or 3 games and only attend one. They write on other games from watching TV. A panel member has more of a right to attend before these half writers. The same guys that were in Croke Park will write about Galway Mayo anyway.
CiarraiMick (Dublin) - Posts: 630 - 16/11/2020 22:45:12
2310449
Link
0
|
|
Replying To KillingFields: "Professional players are getting paid. It is their job. GAA is voluntary ridiculous comparison. Terrible not to let a lad training all the time not experience winning or loosing with his team. Makes no sense for any angle.
gatha (Kilkenny) - Posts: 158 - 16/11/2020 20:53:34How is it a ridiculous comparison? That its their job means they even more should be allowed in as theyre employees and it isnt terrible. Its just part and parcel of life in a time where thousands have died.
If you are not needed to let game take place then you dont travel
Yes the media are important to transmit the ganesbut people who are not working are left in and players are not. Ex players that write newspaper columns should not be left in ahead of panel members. Also do you need all the reporters. Can they not write a report on the game from TV.the government made the rules but many are bending the rules. For example the Sunday fame pundits do Not need to attend the fame unless they are needed for the live programme.
CiarraiMick (Dublin) - Posts: 481 - 16/11/2020 21:11:26 The ex players are journalists and the column writers get their column material from attending games in person. they cant write them without being at games in person.
Each reporter is for a different organisation.
By all means have 26 players of a squad and 1/2 extra in case a players pulls up injured in warm up to allow you have a full bench but if you say let all these players in where do you stop? Who else do you let in?
Its fair to everyone. You are named in squad you can attend. If not you watch at home as if not involved in the game you are making a journey that isnt necessary in a time when we should be restricting movements" Why can't ex players write their column without being at the game in person?
Leftpeg1 (Westmeath) - Posts: 34 - 17/11/2020 00:02:24
2310466
Link
1
|
|
Why do things always get blown out of proportion. Talking about people who went for a trial allowed in. These 10 players journeyed to training last week and will again this week. If not allowing them go to the game is the answer to the virus then we have it beat. I have and do support restrictions to control the virus and realize the disruption to people's lives but this one is petty not allowing 10 players into a large stadium. They are travelling and with the rest of the players several times a week. John Kiely and other managers are not trying to oust or disrupt covid regulations. They are just looking to respect the contribution of all their panel. If the players decided in solidarity that we are all in or all out people on here would be screaming all sorts of things about them because we can not get our fix. This love the games but rain in the player amazes me. It sounds like a sense of entitlement from those who have nothing invested.
Canuck (Waterford) - Posts: 979 - 17/11/2020 01:28:53
2310471
Link
1
|