Garth Brooks concerts cancelled - **READ FIRST POST FOR MOD NOTES**

conorh91

Daith wrote: »

The agreement between Croke Park and the residents doesn't really matter.

Under the actual planning legislation of Ireland, Croke Park can hold three non-sporting events and can apply for more events under a public event licence.

I know that, but contractual issues arise separate to the Planning and Development Act. Hopefully everybody accepts that GAA/Aiken was legally correct in its licensing application insofar as it concerns the Act.

It is now contended that the GAA have entered into some binding agreement (for some unknown reason) to restrict its capacity to hold events. But the GAA deny this and the residents are unwilling to prove it.

All in all, it's hard to believe the residents. Why won't they just prove the GAA are wrong, if they have proof?

Bogdanistan

bumper234 wrote: »

And if Keegan goes into the meeting tomorrow and says he will swear an Affidavit? I think Keegan is hoping Duffy does do this because i think he has proof somewhere that Duffy is lying.

Keegan has given no such undertaking, he merely tried to deny it.
Duffy however is prepared to give a sworn afidavit, unlike Keegan

Reformed Character

Bogdanistan wrote: »

The Oreachteas commited uncovered the fact the DCC fell overthemselves to encourage the 5 from the outset, otherwise Aiken/GAA would not have proceeded, that's what caused this mess. DCC tried to backtrack by pretending two matinees fufilled this.

Bollox they did.
The GAA have made a wholly unsubstantiated claim that such was the case, DCC deny these claims.
The only thing the "culchie n weshtern" committee uncovered is their own bias, stupidity , and ineptitude.
Hadly surprising when it is chaired by the GAA;)

Happyman42

Bogdanistan wrote: »

Keegan is claiming Pauric Duffy, the Director general of the GAA, is a liar,

Where did he call him a 'liar'. Link?

Reformed Character

Bogdanistan wrote: »

Keegan was in today and gave no such undertaking, he merely tried to deny it.
Duffy however is prepared to give a sworn afidavit, unlike Keegan

Duffy tells so many lies it doesn't matter , an affidavit from him would hold as much credibility as a denial of corruption by Ray Burke.

Bogdanistan

Happyman42 wrote: »

Where did he call him a 'liar'. Link?

He's denied Duffy is telling the truth when it was put to him. Duffy is prepared to submit an affidavit, no such commitment from Keegan.

bumper234

Bogdanistan wrote: »

Keegan has given no such undertaking, he merely tried to deny it.
Duffy however is prepared to give a sworn afidavit, unlike Keegan

No he hasn't but if he did what would your view be then? As i said i think Keegan has the proof that Duffy is talking bollox and is just biding his time.

Bogdanistan

Reformed Character wrote: »

The only thing the "culchie n weshtern" committee uncovered is their own bias, stupidity , and ineptitude.
Hadly surprising when it is chaired by the GAA;)

The mask slips again . . .

bumper234

Bogdanistan wrote: »

He's denied Duffy is telling the truth when it was put to him. Duffy is prepared to submit an affidavit, no such commitment from Keegan.

Sure in that case Duffy is calling Keegan a liar.

Bogdanistan

bumper234 wrote: »

No he hasn't but if he did what would your view be then? As i said i think Keegan has the proof that Duffy is talking bollox and is just biding his time.

If ? What's next, if your aunty had balls she'd be your uncle.

The fact remains one of them is clearly has to be lying and only one of them is prepared to submit a sworn affidavit.

Reformed Character

Bogdanistan wrote: »

The mask slips again . . .

As does yours, Jim

Reoil

ThisRegard wrote: »

riddens

Ha!

Bogdanistan

Reformed Character wrote: »

As does yours, Jim

As yours has, owen

muddypaws

Bogdanistan wrote: »

If ? What's next, if your aunty had balls she'd be your uncle.

The fact remains one of them is clearly has to be lying and only one of them is prepared to submit a sworn affidavit.

No, thats not a fact. One of them said yesterday in front of the committee that he is prepared to submit an affidavit, however, I haven't see anywhere that Keegan has said he isn't prepared to do the same. Unless you have a link to that?

Happyman42

Bogdanistan wrote: »

He's denied Duffy is telling the truth when it was put to him. Duffy is prepared to submit an affidavit, no such commitment from Keegan.

So much wrong in a small sentence.

DCC and Keegan have released a statement of their version of events.

Duffy never said diddly squat about an affidavit, that was Peter McKenna.

muddypaws

Bogdanistan wrote: »

As yours has, owen

Oh, so now Owen has two accounts, mine and Reformed Character?

Bogdanistan

muddypaws wrote: »

No, thats not a fact. One of them said yesterday in front of the committee that he is prepared to submit an affidavit, however, I haven't see anywhere that Keegan has said he isn't prepared to do the same. Unless you have a link to that?

He merely denined Keegans claim and his willingness to swear an affidavit, so why if he's telling the truth did he not undertake to do so as well ?

The fact remains one of them is lieing and caused this whole multi million fiasco.

Bogdanistan

Happyman42 wrote: »

So much wrong in a small sentence.

DCC and Keegan have released a statement of their version of events.

Duffy never said diddly squat about an affidavit, that was Peter McKenna.

Then either McKenna is lying or Keegan, which is it ?

bumper234

Bogdanistan wrote: »

If ? What's next, if your aunty had balls she'd be your uncle.

The fact remains one of them is clearly has to be lying and only one of them is prepared to submit a sworn affidavit.

Well Duffy hasn't lodged any affidavit yet so your also talking what ifs and maybes :rolleyes:

muddypaws

Bogdanistan wrote: »

He merely denined it when Duffy's claim and his willingness to swear an affidavit, so why if he's telling the truth did he not undertake to do so as well ?

The fact remains one of them is lieing and caused this whole multi million fiasco.

I have no idea, because, contrary to popular belief, I am not Owen Keegan

However, if I were, possibly because when he appeared in front of the committee on Tuesday, he was under the mistaken belief that the process would be fair and unbiased, and was unprepared for what actually happened. Lets see what happens tomorrow, when he appears back in front of them, he may well arrive with an affidavit, who knows?

slimjimmc

Bogdanistan wrote: »

Then either McKenna is lying or Keegan, which is it ?

It could be neither.
It's only a lie when you tell something knowing it to be untrue. Either party could be under the belief that their version is the correct version. That doesn't make it a lie.

Muise...

muddypaws wrote: »

Oh, so now Owen has two accounts, mine and Reformed Character?

I can't keep up with the masks and the slipping - it's like a mummer's visit of good riddens.

Bogdanistan

muddypaws wrote: »

I have no idea, because, contrary to popular belief, I am not Owen Keegan

However, if I were, possibly because when he appeared in front of the committee on Tuesday, he was under the mistaken belief that the process would be fair and unbiased, and was unprepared for what actually happened. Lets see what happens tomorrow, when he appears back in front of them, he may well arrive with an affidavit, who knows?

So let me get this right, you're now claiming that the Oireachtas committee is unfair and unbiased and that McKenna is lying ? That's a lot claims.

muddypaws

Bogdanistan wrote: »

So let me get this right, you're now claiming that the Oireachtas committee is unfair and unbiased and that McKenna is lying ? That's a lot claims.

Nope, I didn't say McKenna is lying. But the rest, yep. Remind me again how they addressed Owen Keegan, and how they addressed Peter Aiken? Did you watch it? I did, and was shocked and ashamed that these are our elected representatives.

currins_02

It just may be to some extent that all sides are lying to some degree - perish the thought!

For my money Keegan has already admitted to a bit of a "fib" by vociferously saying he had had no contact either formal or informal with Aiken/GAA re GB event prior to the licence application submission. His statement last night, following the accusations by the GAA/Aiken side, confirmed he personally had had informal conversations about the event (regardless of the content) as far back as February. That point alone could back to haunt him.

As for the posts about the updated event plans. For me that's a non story, I've been involved with transport on many large events for years (both punters & crew/artiste's). The traffic plan alone can be changed numerous times. For instance for 1D there was at least 3 previous variations on the final arrangements for punters coaches. The final one was only announced about 10 days before the event. That kind of thing and level of engagement would be fairly normal. While there can be a basic template the different demographics in different events force a situation where each plan must be somewhat unique. For instance, I doubt Mountjoy Square would have had to be used for a parent/child meet & greet for GB, although Garth did say that 75% of tickets were sold to under 25's!! (I should say 90% of the many people I have met with tickets were well over 25!)

The committee meeting will be interesting tomorrow and I believe there is a desire, whether right or wrong, for Keegan's head.

Where's John Downey hiding anyway?

Happyman42

Bogdanistan wrote: »

Then either McKenna is lying or Keegan, which is it ?

When I heard the detail of the call from McKenna I think he just believed what he wanted to believe, (common among those who want the C/W star here).

In that detail, Keegan never gives approval, merely advice on how to make the best possible application. Advice, somebody who was supportive of the 'idea' of gigs would naturally give.

However, we all know that planning is a process.
McKenna is suggesting that the process was ignored on this occaision and that he got approval before an application was made.
A far bigger crisis in my opinion than a few concerts. But our TD's weren't interested in pursuing that.
I'm sure they will if McKenna has the courage to go into a court.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

ThisRegard

Muise... wrote: »

good riddens.

Not you too.

Peppa Pig

Bogdanistan wrote: »

Keegan has given no such undertaking, he merely tried to deny it.
Duffy however is prepared to give a sworn afidavit, unlike Keegan

Have you proof of this

Because yesterday at the Oireachtas committee Peter McKenna said he would swear an affidaavit, not Paraic Duffy.

Muise...

ThisRegard wrote: »

Not you too.

For all intensive porpoises my mask slipped ages ago, so yeah, me too on the riddens, riding into the sunset irregardless. Hi ho.