Garth Brooks Comeback Special *ALL 5 SHOWS CANCELLED* READ FIRST POST

salmocab

Think everyone is just too used to money riding roughshod over planning in this country, applying for planning and having all your documentation in doesn't entitle you to permission, you make an application then people can make their objections known then the relevant authority make a decision its democracy, might not have always worked this way but it did this time. DCC don't gain anything by not having these concerts go ahead so they didn't have any other motives.

bluemachaveli

Mr.S wrote: »

Jesus this whole ordeal is not even over yet.

"Garths" letter to Aiken is bizzare.

Is it even legally possible to reverse the lisence decision?

If that's real then I think cancelling the concerts was nothing more than a media stunt. I'd expect them to be back on over the weekend.

Harry Angstrom

*Gets bucket of popcorn*

j8wk2feszrnpao

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

Hang on, if they were being refused because Croke Park only allows three concerts a year, then there would be no reason to wait for any possible further objections, as that in itself would have been enough to refuse the licences.

Croker and the residents have an agreement on 3 concerts, i.e. no objections. Croker/promoter will still need to go through the licensing process for these 3.

Croker/promoter can try to have 100 concerts on top of those three if they wish. But DCC will make a decision on any further concerts based on a number of factors.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

The truth is they sat on their hands for weeks on end, knowing well that 400,000 tickets were sold to concerts that they were most likely not going to fully licence and that is a disgrace. It is what has caused this mess, or at least, what caused the level to which the whole fiasco has ascending to.

Back up the truck.
The DCC did not sell any tickets or make any promises.
They are not the ones who caused the mess.

The timing of their decision is part of the whole process and Aiken were well aware of how long it would take.
They require the 10 weeks to go through all the documentation supplied, and any possible objections.
Given the large scale of the event, and the known objections that were likely, they should have received the submission sooner; which would have allowed for further discussions to be made and a resolution to be arrived at earlier time.

Keegan has to look at more than just the promoter and the artist who want to make some money and those that want to see GB; he also has to take into consideration those that live in the area (who are negatively affected).

ghostdancer

and the injunction will be re-submitted if there's any sign of 3/4/5 going ahead, so that leave us in the High Court....

miju

Its interesting that the injunction was dropped on the grounds that he realised his error.

Amount of pressure at this stage on the residents o right their wrongs is phenomonel and 24 hours for somone with some common sense to sort this.

Lets see how shocked our FG ministrrs are niw they have one last chance or will they do the usual wringing of hands wasters that they are

The_Morrigan

Mr.S wrote: »

Jesus this whole ordeal is not even over yet.

"Garths" letter to Aiken is bizzare.

Is it even legally possible to reverse the lisence decision?

If this is a stunt, it's very very unfair on people who have started to organise refunds and cancel travel plans.

miju

ghostdancer wrote: »

and the injunction will be re-submitted if there's any sign of 3/4/5 going ahead, so that leave us in the High Court....

He has permanently withdrawn it on basis he has had a change of heart / realizes the damage and the fact he had to stay in a b and b last night such was the amount if threats him and his family recieved and rightly so

JaMarcusHustle

Seems pretty certain to me that Aiken, the GAA, Brooks etc. are all trying to call our bluff.

Saying "It's 5 or none" and then "Shows are cancelled" and then "Tickets are being refunded" and now Garth's letter.

It's akin to pretending your leaving in order to get someone who's coming with you to hurry up. "Okay I'm going now....I'm walking towards the door........I have my keys...........I'm about to leave now, you better hurry up....."

Corholio

miju wrote: »

Its interesting that the injunction was dropped on the grounds that he realised his error.

Amount of pressure at this stage on the residents o right their wrongs is phenomonel and 24 hours for somone with some common sense to sort this.

Lets see how shocked our FG ministrrs are niw they have one last chance or will they do the usual wringing of hands wasters that they are

It wasn't dropped because of that. It was dropped because he felt he had made his point, there was no error at all. It's the people who had been threatening him who should apologise for their 'errors'.

Also what a horrible thing to say that someone had threats 'rightly so'.

j8wk2feszrnpao

miju wrote: »

Amount of pressure at this stage on the residents o right their wrongs is phenomonel and 24 hours for somone with some common sense to sort this.

Right what wrongs? Standing up for themselves is not wrong, it's a right.

miju wrote: »

He has permanently withdrawn it on basis he has had a change of heart / realizes the damage and the fact he had to stay in a b and b last night such was the amount if threats him and his family recieved and rightly so

Wow, so now it is right that he and his family received threats. That is a disgusting comment.

miju

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

Seems pretty certain to me that Aiken, the GAA, Brooks etc. are all trying to call our bluff.

Saying "It's 5 or none" and then "Shows are cancelled" and then "Tickets are being refunded" and now Garth's letter.

It's akin to pretending your leaving in order to get someone who's coming with you to hurry up. "Okay I'm going now....I'm walking towards the door........I have my keys...........I'm about to leave now, you better hurry up....."

Think its more a case of last chance for someone not to poss away 50 mill for our economy

miju

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Right what wrongs? Standing up for themselves is not wrong, it's a right.


Wow, so now it is right that he and his family received threats. That is a disgusting comment.

Im not advocating diddly squat but A bloke living 2km from the stadium throwing his oar in for the sake if it should well have expected that backlash, FFS im not much further out from Croler than that i may as well lob an injunction in as well

Corholio

miju wrote: »

A bloke living 2km from the stadium throwing his oar in for the sake if it should well have expected that backlash, FFS im not much further out from Croler than that i may as well lob an injunction in as well

NO ONE should have threats against them for that, no one. Then people wondered why some were happy the concerts were cancelled, they were happy because there is people like that about.

Lollipop95

wow this whole thing is an absolute mess! Is it even possible for all 5 concerts to be played now? That cancellation posted yesterday seemed pretty final..interestingly yesterday I heard an interview on the radio with Louis Walsh who is good friends with Peter Atiken. He said he believed/hoped a compromise would be reached

mikom

Garth brooks wrote that................. He did in his hole.
Look at the amount of phrases in it that are rarely uttered in the states.
Spoof and carpet bagging.

Lollipop95

wow this whole thing is an absolute mess! Is it even possible for all 5 concerts to be played now? That cancellation posted yesterday seemed pretty final..interestingly yesterday I heard an interview on the radio with Louis Walsh who is good friends with Peter Atiken. He said he believed/hoped a compromise would be reached

Sala

I am hoping DCC stick to their guns. If not it will just show enough pressure from concert promoters / the public will make them breach their own regulations despite the law not allowing for it. I still maintain the decision for 3 was very fair for Both sides and garth brooks and his promoter are behaving appallingly.

I can't believe the person who sought an injunction is receiving death threats over a concert. He's entitled to access to the courts to make his case same as everyone else and I hope the gardai find these people and they are prosecuted.

Harry Angstrom

Garth's aiken breakin heart

Shaneosexual

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

Garth's aiken breakin heart

That would be funny if it wasn't a Billy Ray Cyrus song.

miju

Sala wrote: »

I can't believe the person who sought an injunction is receiving death threats over a concert. He's entitled to access to the courts to make his case same as everyone else and I hope the gardai find these people and they are prosecuted.

Absolutely agree everyone should have access to the courts but given he lives 2-3km from the venue and the fact he admitted funding for the action came from people from outside the state (in his words) it would have to be said that in tbis case there seems to have been some ulterior motive at play clearly

And again just as he has the right to access the courts people also have the right to have their opinions on him heard and if he didnt think it was going to be a reaction to his actions then hes foolish / wreckless or both.

calex71

miju wrote: »

He has permanently withdrawn it on basis he has had a change of heart / realizes the damage and the fact he had to stay in a b and b last night such was the amount if threats him and his family recieved and rightly so

I'm not sure what you are saying, it's right he stayed in a b&b because of threats or it's right he received threats??????

miju

The former

seligehgit

Absolutely despicable behaviour by those people who issued death threats against that local resident who took out the injunction.It's his constitutional right to do same if he so wishes and not have people ride roughshoud over his property rights.

miju

seligehgit wrote: »

Absolutely despicable behaviour by those people who issued death threats against that local resident who took out the injunction.It's his constitutional right to do same if he so wishes and not have people ride roughshoud over his property rights.

And it is theirs to make their feelings known to him regardless of the level of intelligence involved.

He wanted attention and he got it and hopefully he learned not to be a patsy in future by having people out of the state funding his misadventures in court.

Given the level of raging going on he surely knew what he was letting himself in for and if he didnt he was a fool and ive no sympathy for him likewise id have no sympathy for the people making the threats being prosecuted

Happyman42

miju wrote: »

And it is theirs to make their feelings known to him regardless of the level of intelligence involved.

He wanted attention and he got it and hopefully he learned not to be a patsy in future by having people out of the state funding his misadventures in court.

Given the level of raging going on he surely knew what he was letting himself in for and if he didnt he was a fool and ive no sympathy for him likewise id have no sympathy for the people making the threats being prosecuted

Step away from your computer, take off the stetson and realise what you advocating here.

miju

Happyman42 wrote: »

Step away from your computer, take off the stetson and realise what you advocating here.

Firstly not a GB fan (herself is) and secondly im not advocating anything im pointing out the obvious facts.

Whether you choose to see them through rose tinted glasses is your own choice

Lastly, stetsons are cool

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Croker/promoter can try to have 100 concerts on top of those three if they wish. But DCC will make a decision on any further concerts based on a number of factors.

Eh, nothing I said suggest otherwise.

Back up the truck.
The DCC did not sell any tickets or make any promises.
They are not the ones who caused the mess.

They don't have to have sold tickets to be to be at least partially to blame for this fiasco.

The timing of their decision is part of the whole process and Aiken were well aware of how long it would take.

They were in discussions with Aiken all along and gave no indication that any of the concerns they had, would result in licence refusal for any of the nights.

They require the 10 weeks to go through all the documentation supplied, and any possible objections.

They do in their arse require ten weeks, quite talking nonsense.

The deadline is ten weeks.

If you were correct, then that would mean they could only be able to issue licences on the day events take place.

Given the large scale of the event, and the known objections that were likely, they should have received the submission sooner; which would have allowed for further discussions to be made and a resolution to be arrived at earlier time.

They did. Four weeks before the deadline and you are ignoring the fact that they were in discussions with DCC for months prior and that too is part of the process of applying for licences.

Keegan has to look at more than just the promoter and the artist who want to make some money and those that want to see GB; he also has to take into consideration those that live in the area (who are negatively affected).

That was happening before the licences were applied for and the window is there for objections. Once that has passed, they can make their decision. It shouldn't have taken them almost three months to inform the promotor that they were refusing two licences. No matter which way you try to spin it.

Sala

miju wrote: »

And it is theirs to make their feelings known to him regardless of the level of intelligence involved.

He wanted attention and he got it and hopefully he learned not to be a patsy in future by having people out of the state funding his misadventures in court.

Given the level of raging going on he surely knew what he was letting himself in for and if he didnt he was a fool and ive no sympathy for him likewise id have no sympathy for the people making the threats being prosecuted

No one has the right to make their "feelings known" by making death threats against someone- that's why it's a crime.

8-10

seligehgit wrote: »

Absolutely despicable behaviour by those people who issued death threats against that local resident who took out the injunction.

Death threats? Actually threatening to KILL somebody? WTF? What are we coming to? Jesus wept there's gotta be some perspective here there's people actually threatening murder over a concert getting cancelled.

I'm speechless. I cannot understand or believe this is happening. I'm disappointed it's cancelled and all but man life goes on! I hope to God it's just speculation and this hasn't actually happened