Diarmuid Connolly

ArielAtom

There are people posting on here who have stated they have no interest in the GAA. Why come on and post. This is not a problem for the GAA, this happened in a pub when Connolly was not on duty with the Dublin team. He has been sentenced and accepted his punishment.

Why people think Dublin GAA need to now act on that fact I do not know. If the posters feel this is a sentence that needs discussing further take it to the legal forum. It is not a GAA related item. If we were to bring everything a Soccer, GAA or Rugby player did to the relevant sports forum it would leave no room for discussing the topic it was set up for.

STB

Lucas Castroman wrote: »

Disturbingly idiotic comment. Does Dublin GAA not operate by any moral code whatsoever? Does anything go? Violent criminals? Rapists? Paedophiles? Murderers? The silence is deafening from Dublin GAA - has any official statement been released?
If they had any moral compass, they would suspend him for at least a year.
The general consensus seems to be "who cares if he has a violent uncontrollable temper, he's some boy to kick a point"
We are continually bombarded with how professional GAA players are nowadays, yet if this scenario involved a soccer player they would no doubt be suspended by their club.
These players are portrayed as role models - what message does it portray if this goes unpunished?

I said I didn't condone it. And let me just clarify what I said earlier. In terms of "what he does on the pitch is what counts" was said with regard to this being a GAA forum on boards where GAA is discussed and NOT second guessing a Judge's decision in a Court case and demanding that the GAA add to a judges decision. The victim in this case has also accepted his apology.

There are plenty of court cases around the country that have received less media coverage that have resulted in similar court decisions. All you need to do is google "Gaelic Football player assault" and you will see that it is more common than you think, both on and off the pitch.

Despite other posts on this thread Diarmuid Connolly's disciplinary record on the pitch over the last 3 years has been very good. His performances on the pitch have been excellent during the league this year.

I'm sure we all would like to think that we could get a second chance, without begrudgery. Let he who cast the first stone etc.

rebel girl 15

i've deleted a numbers of comments, I don't care your opinion on the matter but we don't tolerate name calling of players around here.

Warning to everyone to thread lightly, as I can see this getting heated

Paranoid Mandroid

largepants wrote: »

I'd seriously question the thinking of the courts when putting a person with obvious anger issues working with kids. From experience thats anything but calming.

This isn't right, insinuating such things.

NavyandBlue

Lucas Castroman wrote: »

If Dublin GAA wanted to make a statement about violent disorder they should suspend Diarmaid Connolly and condemn outrightly his behaviour - perhaps this would alienate "the hill". Instead, they have said nothing and in doing so, speak volumes about the mentality and lack of morality within GAA circles. Violence is a growing problem in this society - the GAA portray themselves as a bastion of irish society yet when they have had an opportunity to make a statement they have been found wanting.

This is something which really angers me and intend contacting the Dublin GAA county board regarding their apathy. Society has to be consistent in these matters. On one hand, we unreservedly abhor violence yet if somebody can kick a ball, it is acceptable for them to engage in a violent UNPROVOKED vicious assault.

Yes, close the thread when a genuine issue has been raised - maybe you like to keep things light and superficial around here.

Reading these posts is something of an education and helps me understand why society is rapidly disintegrating when such opinions/mentalities exist.

"it only matters what he does on the pitch"
Go cheer your hero with a clear conscience.

I disagree with the leniency of the sentence. But ultimately this is a matter for the Courts and not the GAA. If he was assigned to perform his community service with a particular club and that club refused because of the violent nature of the offence, I would have no objection.

It's not the job of the GAA to impose an additional punishment on Connolly. I don't see how continuing to pick Connolly is an endorsement of his off-field activities. Are there any actual cases where a sporting organisation has suspended a player for a period in excess of the time they are legally obliged to do so - either by the law of the land or the internal rules of the sporting body? I understand your point about moral apathy - but directing your ire at a sporting body is not the best course of action. Lobbying your local TD to legislate for reduced judicial discretion in imposing sentences would surely be a wiser and more effective path to follow.

And how far should the non-judicial punishment extend? What is the logical conclusion of your argument? He should be suspended from playing for the Dublin senior team - does this extend to suspension from any GAA activities? And should he be punished in other facets of his life? Should he be excluded from a place of worship because they object to violent assault? Should he be excluded from a restaurant because the owner finds his previous actions distasteful? Engaging in non-judicial punishment can open up a can of worms.

largepants

Paranoid Mandroid wrote: »

This isn't right, insinuating such things.

Was he not ordered to do an anger management course?

yop

ProudDUB wrote: »

Do we have any legal experts in the house?

What would usually be considered a "normal" sentence for someone in DC's position. If you plead guilty, you do what the court told you to do re paying compensation, you had no previous convictions for anything and you have kept your nose clean since the incident....what sentence could the average Joe, in the same position, expect to get?

Would a custodial sentence be the norm for someone on their first conviction? I find that hard to believe, when we seem to have God knows how many people with dozens of convictions to their name, wandering the streets scot free.

It is very easy to say that he got off lightly because he is an inter county footballer, but if community service is the norm for situations like these, then he just got the same treatment as every one else. I am not saying he did, I am just asking the question, as to what the "norm" would be in situations like these.

From any cases I have read or heard he got what the large majority get, whether they be GAA/Rugby or just "normal Joes".
It would be extremely harsh that he would get a custodial sentence for his 1st offence and it doesn't happen unless the assault leaves the victim long term incapacitated and even then there are many cases where the person walks away with a warning and/or fine and/or community service.

In his defense its his 1st offense, he pleaded guilty, he offered compensation and he admitted he was in the wrong. Because he is a GAA player/star this can't have any effect on the case or mean he should get a harsher or lesser sentence.

From the GAA side of it, which hasn't been done previous and probably needs to come from the top, which I personally think it should, if a player is convicted of a crime as serious of this or on a similar line then they should be suspended until the case is fully closed. It happens in the UK with regards soccer players, the clubs suspend them immediately.

The intercounty lads are idols to our kids, its not a great example that like in this case and many others, they continue to play for their clubs and/or counties.

I find it strange though that a lad who has confirmed anger issues and is receiving treatment for same is now working with kids, I as a parent would not be happy that a guy no matter who he was, who had been convicted of an unprovoked assault, was now working with my kids, if its community service the person should be out sweeping the streets like they do in other countries.

NavyandBlue

yop wrote: »

From the GAA side of it, which hasn't been done previous and probably needs to come from the top, which I personally think it should, if a player is convicted of a crime as serious of this or on a similar line then they should be suspended until the case is fully closed. It happens in the UK with regards soccer players, the clubs suspend them immediately.

The intercounty lads are idols to our kids, its not a great example that like in this case and many others, they continue to play for their clubs and/or counties.

The analogy with soccer clubs is surely not the best example because that would involve an employment relationship. The club's reputation is much more closely connected to the actions of its employees (as the club is playing their wages) than is the case between the County Board and a County player in the GAA. Also, the contract of employment for soccer players would establish a legal position where the clubs are clearly entitled take such suspensory action - I don't think there is anything with the internal rules of the GAA to cater for this. The intercounty player is not in receipt of remuneration (leaving aside any income they would receive from third party sponsors resulting from their intercounty career) from the GAA, therefore I don't think it would be right for the GAA to insist that the player lives an exemplary off-field lifestyle before they are picked.

And I don't really buy the "think of the children" argument. Nothing that good parenting couldn't solve.

keane2097

NavyandBlue wrote: »

The analogy with soccer clubs is surely not the best example because that would involve an employment relationship. The club's reputation is much more closely connected to the actions of its employees (as the club is playing their wages) than is the case between the County Board and a County player in the GAA. Also, the contract of employment for soccer players would establish a legal position where the clubs are clearly entitled take such suspensory action - I don't think there is anything with the internal rules of the GAA to cater for this. The intercounty player is not in receipt of remuneration (leaving aside any income they would receive from third party sponsors resulting from their intercounty career) from the GAA, therefore I don't think it would be right for the GAA to insist that the player lives an exemplary off-field lifestyle before they are picked.

And I don't really buy the "think of the children" argument. Nothing that good parenting couldn't solve.

I agree that the whole idea of role models in general is pretty problematic, particularly so when it comes to GAA players who I find it hard to put any burden or expectation on in that regard since they're amateurs.

That said, I do see that there's an argument that Dublin should have stopped playing him while the case was ongoing, particularly as he had acknowledged guilt.

A panel are entitled to expect a certain level of behaviour regardless of whether someone is being paid to be there or not, and it could possibly have been an opportunity for the Dublin panel to take a moral highground position and say Connolly isn't going to be involved while this is going on because we don't want to be seen to implicitly condone his behaviour. Once the case is over, it's dealt with by the correct means and he should be able to return to action.

I'm not totally convinced that would be the correct action either, but there's certainly an argument for it.

Paranoid Mandroid

largepants wrote: »

Was he not ordered to do an anger management course?

He was. The way i read your comment you insinuated that he'd lash out at kids. That's not fair IMO. He apologised, got his punishment, now his name is forever tarnished in public, everywhere he goes. With everything else, its punishment enough. Thats all I'll say on it.

kippy

nice_guy80 wrote: »

he was already found guilty and admitted guilt.
yesterday was his sentencing.
I would have though county teams would have codes of discipline for players and management

I've only loosely kept an eye on this case.

The "punishment" isn't really a "punishment" - I assume the judge it giving the guy a chance and hoping he wises up. To be honest, I'd be pretty pi$$ed if I were the victim however - It seems to be a case of letting the guy who does the crime off easily while forgetting about the impact on the victim.
That being said, I hope he does wise up.

On the "codes of discipline" issue.
Controversial here, but its difficult for a club or body to have a code for behaviour outside of the sporting field when some of the behavior that occurs on the field of play would be construed as assault in the "real world". Indeed some of the behavior is encouraged on the field of play in some quarters.
(Not specifically saying anything about Vincents or Dublin GAA, it's just a general comment)

jacko

NavyandBlue wrote: »

... Nothing that good parenting couldn't solve.

So are you saying that Connollys parents failed him then?

Ash.J.Williams

kippy wrote: »

I've only loosely kept an eye on this case.

The "punishment" isn't really a "punishment" - I assume the judge it giving the guy a chance and hoping he wises up. To be honest, I'd be pretty pi$$ed if I were the victim however - It seems to be a case of letting the guy who does the crime off easily while forgetting about the impact on the victim.
That being said, I hope he does wise up.

On the "codes of discipline" issue.
Controversial here, but its difficult for a club or body to have a code for behaviour outside of the sporting field when some of the behavior that occurs on the field of play would be construed as assault in the "real world". Indeed some of the behavior is encouraged on the field of play in some quarters.
(Not specifically saying anything about Vincents or Dublin GAA, it's just a general comment)

I think Diarmuid can count himself lucky that he assaulted a very reasonable chap.

yop

NavyandBlue wrote: »

The analogy with soccer clubs is surely not the best example because that would involve an employment relationship. The club's reputation is much more closely connected to the actions of its employees (as the club is playing their wages) than is the case between the County Board and a County player in the GAA. Also, the contract of employment for soccer players would establish a legal position where the clubs are clearly entitled take such suspensory action - I don't think there is anything with the internal rules of the GAA to cater for this. The intercounty player is not in receipt of remuneration (leaving aside any income they would receive from third party sponsors resulting from their intercounty career) from the GAA, therefore I don't think it would be right for the GAA to insist that the player lives an exemplary off-field lifestyle before they are picked.

And I don't really buy the "think of the children" argument. Nothing that good parenting couldn't solve.

Happens in all sports, have a good for assault, suspension.
Regardless of whether they are paid or not, they are representing their club and county and need to behave in a way that reflects this.

So you think players whether they are GAA/Soccer/Rugby etc don't influence kids?? Ask anyone who coaches kids and ask them what influence the diving from the PL has had on games.

Ash.J.Williams

It typical GAA fashion they rally around the star like he's the victim, no doubt he got plenty of sympathy and all are delighted now that he can move on and get on with his life after his 2 year hell/ordeal.

keane2097

yop wrote: »

Happens in all sports, have a good for assault, suspension.
Regardless of whether they are paid or not, they are representing their club and county and need to behave in a way that reflects this.

So you think players whether they are GAA/Soccer/Rugby etc don't influence kids?? Ask anyone who coaches kids and ask them what influence the diving from the PL has had on games.

Era that's only an auld cod. If the coach told his kids before the game that anyone diving would be hauled off and dropped and he followed through with it it would soon stop.

Kids diving in soccer matches on a Saturday morning is the coaches' issue, not Ronaldo's.

You think Sean Cavanagh would carry on diving if Mickey Harte hauled him off for it a few times?

yop

keane2097 wrote: »

Era that's only an auld cod. If the coach told his kids before the game that anyone diving would be hauled off and dropped and he followed through with it it would soon stop.

Kids diving in soccer matches on a Saturday morning is the coaches' issue, not Ronaldo's.

You think Sean Cavanagh would carry on diving if Mickey Harte hauled him off for it a few times?

Ok, so where do you think the kids pick up the diving or flicks or free kicks styles from? Where do kids pick up the idea of a new hair style or a collar up or a new colored pair of boots?

The kid sees Rooney doing a bicycle kick or a dive by Ronaldo on a Saturday, so on the Sunday morning a few of them will try it, what is a coach meant to do, watch every game and before the match on the Saturday and then outline what they can or can't do?
Have you coached underage?

keane2097

yop wrote: »

Ok, so where do you think the kids pick up the diving or flicks or free kicks styles from? Where do kids pick up the idea of a new hair style or a collar up or a new colored pair of boots?

The kid sees Rooney doing a bicycle kick or a dive by Ronaldo on a Saturday, so on the Sunday morning a few of them will try it, what is a coach meant to do, watch every game and before the match on the Saturday and then outline what they can or can't do?
Have you coached underage?

If the coach wants to cut out behaviour it's simple. Underage players in my club have been dropped indefinitely for fighting on the pitch etc. One lad got three red cards at U16, didn't play again for the year, was allowed play again at minor and was never in so much as a scuffle.

Abdication of responsibility by adults with actual interaction with kids is a disgrace. Blame the TV my hole.

yop

keane2097 wrote: »

If the coach wants to cut out behaviour it's simple. Underage players in my club have been dropped indefinitely for fighting on the pitch etc. One lad got three red cards at U16, didn't play again for the year, was allowed play again at minor and was never in so much as a scuffle.

Abdication of responsibility by adults with actual interaction with kids is a disgrace. Blame the TV my hole.

So would your club then have been banned Diarmuid Connolly indefinitely from your club for his off the pitch fighting?

So kids watching games are not influenced then by what they see is that what you think?

keane2097

yop wrote: »

So kids watching games are not influenced then by what they see is that what you think?

That's not what I think in the slightest. I said it's the coaches' responsibility to disabuse his kids of any odious notions they pick up from other sources and that it is a very simple thing to do. If he can't or doesn't want to or finds himself blaming the TV for things his players do on the pitch I would suggest he take some time to reassess his approach.

Anyway, this thread is about Diarmuid Connolly, not coaches who lack the ability to instruct their teams properly.

keane2097

yop wrote: »

So would your club then have been banned Diarmuid Connolly indefinitely from your club for his off the pitch fighting?

There's a precedent that players who consistently get red cards stop getting game time for an indeterminate period until their attitude has suitably adjusted.

Realistically, with someone like Connolly exceptions are likely to be made by most clubs, but thankfully it's not a problem we typically have to deal with since players are coached with proper discipline at underage level.

This is so obvious. Kids for the vast majority of cases don't dive at GAA or rugby training because it's not accepted by their coaches and peers. Dive, you're told to cop yourself on or you're dropped, while your teammates tell you stop being a wimp.

yop

keane2097 wrote: »

That's not what I think in the slightest. I said it's the coaches' responsibility to disabuse his kids of any odious notions they pick up from other sources and that it is a very simple thing to do. If he can't or doesn't want to or finds himself blaming the TV for things his players do on the pitch I would suggest he take some time to reassess his approach.

Anyway, this thread is about Diarmuid Connolly, not coaches who lack the ability to instruct their teams properly.

lol, I will wait until you have responsibility for 25 kids on a training pitch or 20 during a game before you to understand how you might coordinate a teamtalk outlining the dos and don't of what they saw the previous day to a bunch of U10's or U8's, you seemingly haven't coached at underage, until then you can't grasp it and obviously can't assess it.

yop

keane2097 wrote: »

There's a precedent that players who consistently get red cards stop getting game time for an indeterminate period until their attitude has suitably adjusted.

Realistically, with someone like Connolly exceptions are likely to be made by most clubs, but thankfully it's not a problem we typically have to deal with since players are coached with proper discipline at underage level.

This is so obvious. Kids for the vast majority of cases don't dive at GAA or rugby training because it's not accepted by their coaches and peers. Dive, you're told to cop yourself on or you're dropped, while your teammates tell you stop being a wimp.

If that applied to all walks of life it would be great, it doesn't.

Who said that kids dive at GAA? Its not just diving, kids are easily influenced, GAA, Rugby, soccer etc etc.

bruschi

yop wrote: »

lol, I will wait until you have responsibility for 25 kids on a training pitch or 20 during a game before you to understand how you might coordinate a teamtalk outlining the dos and don't of what they saw the previous day to a bunch of U10's or U8's, you seemingly haven't coached at underage, until then you can't grasp it and obviously can't assess it.

if your issue is what the kids see on the field and copying players, show them the video of Connollys performance in the Club final, that should be enough for them to see how to play football.

if your team talks revolve around watching what has been on tv, then there is something wrong.

I agree, that GAA players are role models, but seriously, there is a line of taking it too far. Do you think your Under 10s are going to go into a bar and lamp some fella across the head because he heard Connolly did it?

freddiek

i have not ever come across an interview with Connolly either in print or on camera. Strange as he is undoubtedly one of the best players in the country and taking into account how obsessed the media is with the Dubs.

perhaps he's just not the sharpest tool in the box and the Dubs management are aware of it. as his victim discovered in this instance.

keane2097

yop wrote: »

lol, I will wait until you have responsibility for 25 kids on a training pitch or 20 during a game before you to understand how you might coordinate a teamtalk outlining the dos and don't of what they saw the previous day to a bunch of U10's or U8's, you seemingly haven't coached at underage, until then you can't grasp it and obviously can't assess it.

Wrong again I'm afraid.

Godge

Lucas Castroman wrote: »

You've got me - this is a childish attempt to derail Dublin's Championship run so that my own backwater can have a shot.

I have little interest in GAA but this goes beyond and reflects societies attitude to violence - playing for Dublin is a prestigious opportunity. These players are role models. Your "win at all costs" mentality condones the behaviour of this player who has displayed he is violent, aggressive and dangerous both on and off the pitch.

If Dublin GAA wanted to make a statement about violent disorder they should suspend Diarmaid Connolly and condemn outrightly his behaviour - perhaps this would alienate "the hill". Instead, they have said nothing and in doing so, speak volumes about the mentality and lack of morality within GAA circles. Violence is a growing problem in this society - the GAA portray themselves as a bastion of irish society yet when they have had an opportunity to make a statement they have been found wanting.

This is something which really angers me and intend contacting the Dublin GAA county board regarding their apathy. Society has to be consistent in these matters. On one hand, we unreservedly abhor violence yet if somebody can kick a ball, it is acceptable for them to engage in a violent UNPROVOKED vicious assault.

Yes, close the thread when a genuine issue has been raised - maybe you like to keep things light and superficial around here.

Reading these posts is something of an education and helps me understand why society is rapidly disintegrating when such opinions/mentalities exist.

"it only matters what he does on the pitch"
Go cheer your hero with a clear conscience.

Yes, society has to be consistent in these matters.

We appoint judges to be the arbiters of that consistency, we do not allow mob rule or lynching. In this case, the judge ruled that community service was appropriate and it should involve teaching GAA to kids.

Now you believe that this sentence is lenient? You are throwing consistency out the door.

Now you believe that the Dublin GAA should throw the book at him? You are throwing consistency out the door.

MayoAreMagic

Godge
Yes, society has to be consistent in these matters.
We appoint judges to be the arbiters of that consistency, we do not allow mob rule or lynching. In this case, the judge ruled that community service was appropriate and it should involve teaching GAA to kids.
Now you believe that this sentence is lenient? You are throwing consistency out the door.
Now you believe that the Dublin GAA should throw the book at him? You are throwing consistency out the door.

No that isn't accurate at all. The belief is that the sentence was more lenient than other sentences handed out for similar crimes, and it is, that was established earlier in the thread via examples. Surely that is actually searching for consistency rather than undermining it?

Godge

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

No that isn't accurate at all. The belief is that the sentence was more lenient than other sentences handed out for similar crimes, and it is, that was established earlier in the thread via examples. Surely that is actually searching for consistency rather than undermining it?

No. we didn't. It took until the twelfth convictions for the GAA player in Donegal to get a custodial sentence and James MacCartan didn't even get community service.

What we established is that Diarmuid Connolly's sentence is somewhere in the middle. As we were not in court to judge all of the evidence and hear all of the context, we can only accept the conviction and sentencing as fair.

yop

MayoAreMagic - If you press the "QUOTE button there you will quote that persons comment, save you copying and bolding.

Lucas Castroman

Godge wrote: »

Yes, society has to be consistent in these matters.

We appoint judges to be the arbiters of that consistency, we do not allow mob rule or lynching. In this case, the judge ruled that community service was appropriate and it should involve teaching GAA to kids.

Now you believe that this sentence is lenient? You are throwing consistency out the door.

Now you believe that the Dublin GAA should throw the book at him? You are throwing consistency out the door.

If this country had a proper legal system Diarmuid Connolly would be sitting in Mountjoy due to attempted manslaughter.

However, you are confusing the two issues. It is already acknowledged that the legal system has once again proved inadequate in sentencing however I am discussing the GAA's code of ethics (or lack thereof). IF he intentionally cracked somebody's skull on the field of play he would receive a criminal sentence (probably 3 weeks teaching Roscommon the nuances of the fist pass) and a lifetime ban from the GAA - would he not? We bury our head in the sand when it happens a few days after a match?

If you are satisfied with your team playing a violent psychopathic thug then I think this reflects most poorly on you. Perhaps you've never had first hand experience of real violence and in that case I'd hope you'd change your tune. I've encountered people like Diarmuid Connolly in my lifetime and I know exactly what he is - but sadly can't explicitly say it here.

Answer me this - Would you be happy with virtually anybody playing for Dublin? A rapist at corner back and a paedophile at full forward?

Nobody is suggesting a "lynching/mob rule" - what I would like is the GAA to make a statement that violent disorder is unacceptable by suspending him for a year. By doing nothing, they condone his behaviour and the slide will continue to an increasingly violent society.
Forget anger management classes, going back to being a nobody electrician could be the best possible treatment for this guy.
I find it sickening that you believe he should waltz back into the Dublin team without any consequences. Just because there is a precedent of turning a blind eye to these matters in the GAA, does not excuse their inaction.

RoscommonTom

The jacks would be the first fellas to be shouting and roaring if it was a meath or kerry fella what did this, when its one of their own fellas it's differnt

NavyandBlue

Lucas Castroman wrote: »

If this country had a proper legal system Diarmuid Connolly would be sitting in Mountjoy due to attempted manslaughter.

:rolleyes: Exaggeration! If the DPP thought that this offence was committed then I'm sure such charges would have been brought. I think we should defer to her decision on this point. FYI, you can't attempt manslaughter - that's just not possible.

Answer me this - Would you be happy with virtually anybody playing for Dublin? A rapist at corner back and a paedophile at full forward?

Again, more exaggeration. S3 Assault is much less serious than those two offences, as reflected by the statutorily prescribed sentences. There is a grey area as to how bad someone's conduct off the pitch must be before they should not be considered for selection. Rape and Paedophilia are obviously so morally and legally reprehensible that an offender should not be picked. S3/1997, on the other hand, is a minor offence. Do you think the bar should be set so high that the GAA should exclude anyone with a criminal offence no matter how petty?

Nobody is suggesting a "lynching/mob rule" - what I would like is the GAA to make a statement that violent disorder is unacceptable by suspending him for a year. By doing nothing, they condone his behaviour and the slide will continue to an increasingly violent society.
Forget anger management classes, going back to being a nobody electrician could be the best possible treatment for this guy.
I find it sickening that you believe he should waltz back into the Dublin team without any consequences. Just because there is a precedent of turning a blind eye to these matters in the GAA, does not excuse their inaction.

How do they condone his behaviour? Is Liam O'Neill personally endorsing Saturday night assault as a recommended lifestyle? I think most people would be able to disassociate the private actions of citizens from the values and principles of an organisation to which they belong. And I must ask again, how far do you think the non-judicial punishment should extend? Should everyone and every entity in society shun Connolly because of his criminal conviction?

keane2097

lol at "attempted manslaughter", impossible by bloody definition. Surely that's the low point of this thread reached.

corny

Hammer Archer wrote: »

I do think this has helped him become a better player. In 2012 and before, he was a liability to Dublin if you look at his red cards against Wexford and Donegal and his antics against Kildare in the O'Byrne Cup, he couldn't be trusted and opposition players knew he would react if they wound him up. He seems to have gotten rid of this aspect of his game and become a better player because of it (unfortunately).

I'm not quite sure he has turned a corner. Look at the replayed Dublin club final last year for example. Got himself sent off for getting involved with McMahon.

He won't ever lose that edge on the pitch imo. Outside of the game i hope he's learned a lesson.

PS This thread is ridiculous now.

rebel girl 15

I'm locking this until I can get onto a computer and edit things

Hammer Archer

We're keeping this closed.
It's run its course.