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

bumper234

nm wrote: »

What did they expect in fairness. "Go on Garth Brooks" is hardly the end of the world.

I was there today, one of 55,000 or so. Couldn't believe how hassle free and smooth it was driving in and out, hardly a traffic jam at all. Couldn't help but think wtf are these lot moaning about.
Try living beside Dundrum Shopping Centre.

Yeah because Sunday afternoon is a great comparison to Monday @ rush hour :rolleyes:

conorh91

Titzon Toast wrote: »

Foolish post is foolish.
How can you compare thousands of locals going to Croker during the day for a match to 80,000 drunken linedancers streaming through the place at night five times in a row?

But DCC were willing to permit 80,000 "drunken line dancers" stream through the place five times in a row.

Arguably they aggravated the intensification by bringing 80,000 people through 5 times in a row in three days.

Residents (rightly) were shocked at that. Thankfully GB rejected it.

I get really suspicious when you have people on here claiming that DCC didn't f**ck up on this. Garth Brooks was juvenile and stupid to reject 3 nights, but DCC were arguably just as stupid in agreeing to Aiken's matinee plan, which would have wreaked genuine havoc.

But of course, this is a black and white situation for most people.
DCC good, GAA baaad.

John_Rambo

HardLuckWoman wrote: »

Go bully someone else

Go making up stories about drumcondra somewhere else.

Titzon Toast

conorh91 wrote: »

But DCC were willing to permit 80,000 "drunken line dancers" stream through the place five times in a row.

Arguably they aggravated the intensification by bringing 80,000 people through 5 times in a row in three days.

Residents (rightly) were shocked at that. Thankfully GB rejected it.

I get really suspicious when you have people on here claiming that DCC didn't f**ck up on this. Garth Brooks was juvenile and stupid to reject 3 nights, but DCC were arguably just as stupid in agreeing to Aiken's matinee plan, which would have wreaked genuine havoc.

But of course, this is a black and white situation for most people.
DCC good, GAA baaad.

You have things fairly muddled there.
DCC didn't fcuk up. Aiken did.
Residents were shocked at the audacity to try and attempt to railroad over them with five gigs in a row after three gigs had been held already during the year.
Why can't you see that? It was Aiken's fault here, and the GAA's fault too for going along with it and trying to bully the residents and DCC.
As they say in Russia. "Tuffski ****ttski"

conorh91

Titzon Toast wrote: »

You have things fairly muddled there.
DCC didn't fcuk up. Aiken did.
Residents were shocked at the audacity to try and attempt to railroad over them with five gigs in a row after three gigs had been held already during the year.
Why can't you see that? It was Aiken's fault here, and the GAA's fault too..

I'm not going to convince you or any of the other hardline DCC supporters.

I'm responding so other people will see what a foolish position you're taking.

Obviously Aiken's matinee concerts idea was idiotic.

But Aiken aren't city planners. We expect a certain standard from our city planners. I'm perfectly happy to criticize Aiken for a sense of entitlement and for coming up with the matinee idea.

But the people who gave it the go-ahead - the city planners, of whom we expect so much - acted totally inappropriately on this.

Again, i;'m not interested in changing your mind. This point is for the benefit of people who don't see the world in black and white.

So people can celebrate that 5-in-a-row didn't get the go-ahead. Except, it did get the go-ahead.

Sierra 117

Did DCC give the matinee shows the go-ahead? I thought they said they'd consider it, not that they agreed to it.

Red Nissan

Titzon Toast wrote: »

You have things fairly muddled there.
DCC didn't fcuk up. Aiken did.
Residents were shocked at the audacity to try and attempt to railroad over them with five gigs in a row after three gigs had been held already during the year.
Why can't you see that? It was Aiken's fault here, and the GAA's fault too for going along with it and trying to bully the residents and DCC.
As they say in Russia. "Tuffski ****ttski"

The supplied links to the Oireachtas Questions refute much of this. Directly from the various horse's mouths in fact and when first aired were actually live, transmitted to all interested.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

muddypaws wrote: »

What? That doesn't make any sense at all.

Again, 3 concerts at CP are pre-licenced, they were the 1D concerts, all others have to apply for a licence, it has long been determined that nowhere does it state in any planning regulations that no more than 3 can be held in a year, that was an agreement between CP and residents, not An Bord Pleanala. Part of the licencing application process involves looking into the effect on local infrastructure, residents etc. So, if, after consultation and delibration, DCC decided that it wasn't in the best interests of the area to allow 5 gigs, then they wouldn't issue the licence for them. If however, after that consultation, it had been determined that local residents, infrastructure etc could handle the concerts, all 5 would have been licenced.

Nothing in your post contradicted what I said. None of it. Yes, the council can licence events further than the three which ABP stipulated when they said that non-sporting events "shall not exceed three per annum" going forward. However, where does it stop? I mean, why bother referencing the ABP agreement (and DCC did) when they pretty much granted licences for 7 concerts this year and would have granted 8 had Croke Park addressed the concerns of the residents "adequately". I mean, it is either a factor in their decision making, or it isn't.

In any case, Keegan's biggest sin is not how many concerts he was willing to licence, it was the way he went about things. Indeed, I have a suspicion that just how Owen Keegan went about things is yet to be fully known. He is very good at hmm'ing and haw'ing his way out of questions. He admited for instance, that he did offer to suggest four concerts to Keogan, but that he now regrets it and can be rightfully criticized for it. To me, that is straight out of the Bertie Ahern handbook on how to waffle your way out of a crisis. He also stated that it was of no significance anyway, as Brooks wouldn't do four, but that is nonsense of the highest order, as how would he know what the significance of what he said was to the people he said it to. Him behaving like that, in Del Boy esque fashion, could have been the very thing which got Brook's nose up: to be told that five concerts is "over intensification". but yet somehow four is grand.

That wasn't the only thing which he says he regrets, he also regrets sending the letter asking if Oireachtas members who are also in the GAA ,would be asked not to attend the hearings. One wonders what else there is that this man regrets, but that is yet to be known.

What I feel Keegan has got away and which I feel is the crux of what went wrong, is not indicating to Aiken and Croke Park that his support for the five concerts was waning. This was put to him by Dooley and all he could say was that if he refused phones calls or told people he wasn't going to support the application process, that he would be condemned for it, but this is classic strawman as nobody asked him why didn't he refuse to take calls or tell McKenna he wasn't going to support the application. As Dooley correctly said to him, that is speaking in absolutes and nobody is either saying that he did speak in absolutes or that he should have. Indeed, we never did get a legitimate answer to that question, despite Big Tom also putting it to him.

He was also asked, that when he said Croke Park hadn't fully met the needs of the residents, just what it was that he would have felt would mean that they had.. and all he could say was that was not a matter for him, but for them and that is a cop out as Mulvey put a report together which was clearly agreeable to all concerned (apart from the Handball alley crowd) and so it was for sure something which Keegan should have extrapolated on, after all, it's the reason he said he did not grant the licences at the end of the day.

conorh91

Sierra 117 wrote: »

Did DCC give the matinee shows the go-ahead? I thought they said they'd consider it, not that they agreed to it.

I think the implication of what was said is clear, however, to even consider such a thing was ludicrous.

How and ever, DCC didn't stop at considering it, they clearly envisaged an affirmative outcome to the proposal:

"...the city council has agreed to a proposal from Aiken Promotions designed to break the impasse that has arisen.

“Under the proposal the city council will consider an updated event management plan, to be submitted in accordance with the licence, whereby the three concerts will proceed but the Saturday and Sunday concerts will start earlier to facilitate separate matinee audiences on these two days.

“This will allow everybody who bought a ticket to see Garth Brooks"

If DCC simply came out and said it would agree to the concerts without being in receipt of the EMP, they would clearly be in breach of their statutory obligations and a judicial review application by residents would be bound to succeed.

But clearly they saw no objection in principle to 160,000 people converging on the "residential area" in a way that would rightly have been completely unacceptable to the residents.

JRant

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

Nothing in your post contradicted what I said. None of it. Yes, the council can licence events further than the three which ABP stipulated when they said that non-sporting events "shall not exceed three per annum" going forward. However, where does it stop? I mean, why bother referencing the ABP agreement (and DCC did) when they pretty much granted licences for 7 concerts this year and would have granted 8 had Croke Park addressed the concerns of the residents "adequately". I mean, it is either a factor in their decision making, or it isn't.

In any case, Keegan's biggest sin is not how many concerts he was willing to licence, it was the way he went about things. Indeed, I have a suspicion that just how Owen Keegan went about things is yet to be fully known. He is very good at hmm'ing and haw'ing his way out of questions. He admited for instance, that he did offer to suggest four concerts to Keogan, but that he now regrets it and can be rightfully criticized for it. To me, that is straight out of the Bertie Ahern handbook on how to waffle your way out of a crisis. He also stated that it was of no significance anyway, as Brooks wouldn't do four, but that is nonsense of the highest order, as how would he know what the significance of what he said was to the people he said it to. Him behaving like that, in Del Boy esque fashion, could have been the very thing which got Brook's nose up: to be told that five concerts is "over intensification". but yet somehow four is grand.

That wasn't the only thing which he says he regrets, he also regrets sending the letter asking if Oireachtas members who are also in the GAA ,would be asked not to attend the hearings. One wonders what else there is that this man regrets, but that is yet to be known.

What I feel Keegan has got away and which I feel is the crux of what went wrong, is not indicating to Aiken and Croke Park that his support for the five concerts was waning. This was put to him by Dooley and all he could say was that if he refused phones calls or told people he wasn't going to support the application process, that he would be condemned for it, but this is classic strawman as nobody asked him why didn't he refuse to take calls or tell McKenna he wasn't going to support the application. As Dooley correctly said to him, that is speaking in absolutes and nobody is either saying that he did speak in absolutes or that he should have. Indeed, we never did get a legitimate answer to that question, despite Big Tom also putting it to him.

He was also asked, that when he said Croke Park hadn't fully met the needs of the residents, just what it was that he would have felt would mean that they had.. and all he could say was that was not a matter for him, but for them and that is a cop out as Mulvey put a report together which was clearly agreeable to all concerned (apart from the Handball alley crowd) and so it was for sure something which Keegan should have extrapolated on, after all, it's the reason he said he did not grant the licences at the end of the day.

The real question that should have been asked was who was putting pressure on the city manager to hold the additional concerts?

Also the Mulvey report was too little too late and was quite rightly rejected. I think we can all gauge Mulvey's real motivations from his subsequent comments. Impartiality would not be a word I'd use to descripe them as.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

JRant wrote: »

The real question that should have been asked was who was putting pressure on the city manager to hold the additional concerts?

You tell us.

Oh and ...

Also the Mulvey report was too little too late and was quite rightly rejected. I think we can all gauge Mulvey's real motivations from his subsequent comments. Impartiality would not be a word I'd use to descripe them as.

Too little too late? And trying to negotiate 4 nights on July 2nd, three weeks before the concerts wasn't?

Also, the residents (excluding the bad apples) were quite happy with the promise to adhere to just three concerts per year and the €500,000 legacy fund, plus the additional €120,000 per year for the community fund.

Aidric

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

Too little too late? And trying to negotiate 4 nights on July 2nd, three weeks before the concerts wasn't?

Crucial point. Why was the decision left so late as to negate provisional measures?

Calina

Aidric wrote: »

Crucial point. Why was the decision left so late as to negate provisional measures?

Because the application was made later than necessary. Everyone seems to be happy to demand to know why DCC made the decision so late. It's a function of when they got the official application. Which was sometime in April. Months after the concerts sold out.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

Calina wrote: »

Because the application was made later than necessary. Everyone seems to be happy to demand to know why DCC made the decision so late. It's a function of when they got the official application. Which was sometime in April. Months after the concerts sold out.

Nonsense.

The licence application was made as soon as it could have been. This was a massive show and it required a lot of planning. Stage had to be designed especially, not to mention the fact that it was all to be shipped from the states. Given all that, Aiken still got the licence application, including a draft event management plan, four weeks BEFORE the deadline of ten weeks: on April 17th.

In any case, as Dooley rather aptly put it too Keegan during the hearings:

"It seems to me as I said, the issues which you refused the five licences were all blindingly obvious to you in advance of that process even beginning.."

roshje

Still flogging dead horse... oh sorry wrong thread...I think

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

Peter Aiken, Garth Brooks, Peter McKenna (Director of Croke Park), Paraic Duffy ( Director General of the GAA) all state that Owen Keegan, right up until July 2nd, gave no indication that he was unhappy with the efforts of either Croke Park (with regards to the additionality of addressing the concerns of the residents) or with Peter Aiken, during either informal discussions or during the statutory meetings which had been held at various points after the event management plan was submitted, and then:

On July 1st: this story breaks.

On July 2nd: Owen Keegan phones Aiken and refuses to licence two of the concerts.

Coincidence? I think not.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Keegan shat the bed.

Mrsbananas

I purchased tickets on my ticketmaster.ie account on behalf of my sister and her friends. This morning I received an event reminder via email for the concert on Friday night. Beyond ridiculous at this stage. This after all the other emails advising me of my refund,my refund on hold, my refund scheduled later than expected etc.
Anyone else get an email today?

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

JRant

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

Keegan shat the bed.

Very fruitful imagination there.

Shat the bed no less. I figured you had the inside track with all your ITK connections but how did you find that out?

Pics or GTFO

Reformed Character

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

Nonsense.

The licence application was made as soon as it could have been. This was a massive show and it required a lot of planning. Stage had to be designed especially, not to mention the fact that it was all to be shipped from the states. Given all that, Aiken still got the licence application, including a draft event management plan, four weeks BEFORE the deadline of ten weeks: on April 17th.

In any case, as Dooley rather aptly put it too Keegan during the hearings:

Except of course DCC didn't refuse 5 licences, they granted three!

mickydoomsux

Mrsbananas wrote: »

I purchased tickets on my ticketmaster.ie account on behalf of my sister and her friends. This morning I received an event reminder via email for the concert on Friday night. Beyond ridiculous at this stage. This after all the other emails advising me of my refund,my refund on hold, my refund scheduled later than expected etc.
Anyone else get an email today?

That email would have been automatically generated and sent. No need to get all worked up about it.

Calina

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

Nonsense.

The licence application was made as soon as it could have been. This was a massive show and it required a lot of planning. Stage had to be designed especially, not to mention the fact that it was all to be shipped from the states. Given all that, Aiken still got the licence application, including a draft event management plan, four weeks BEFORE the deadline of ten weeks: on April 17th.

In any case, as Dooley rather aptly put it too Keegan during the hearings:

Keegan licensed three of the concerts. The reason they are not going ahead has everything to do with Garth Brooks making that decision and nothing to do with Keegan.

Secondly, you're right in that it was a huge undertaking. A lot of that work will have been done before the concerts were even announced.

It seems to me you're willing to cut Aiken a humungous amount of slack here but will not cut Keegan and the DCC any slack at all. It's not because Keegan and the DCC weren't doing their jobs - they did, and their only failing was to make a decision some people didn't like - so why does Aiken get a free pass on leaving things late?

You see, you're putting him in a bind. Either he obtains the licence before he can sell the tickets, or else at least applies for it, or else he guesses the demand and plans concerts on that basis.

Which would suggest 2, maybe 3 concerts was all you'd have gotten anyway.

bumper234

To all of the GB fans whinging about the Croke park residents objecting to concerts and continuously saying things like "Well Marley park holds concerts and their residents don't mind"

I'll just leave this here for your perusal

http://gometro.ie/2014/07/marlay-residents-seek-concert-cap/

Marlay residents seek concert cap

July 21, 2014, 6:00 am
RESIDENTS in the Marlay Park area of the city are looking for a cap of three events per year at the Rathfarnham amenity after the three-day Longitude festival drew to a close yesterday.

Eight separate events have been held at the site this year, including Arcade Fire, Kings of Leon and Kanye West.

Speaking to The Sunday Times, Marlay Grange Residents Association chairman Tom Ryan said: ‘We want to meet with [Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown] Council and say: “You overdid it this year. These concerts have been going on a month and people’s patience is wearing thin.”’

Mrsbananas

mickydoomsux wrote: »

That email would have been automatically generated and sent. No need to get all worked up about it.

Who said I was getting worked up? I just think at this stage it's beyond a farce and no one has come out of it looking good.

stefan idiot jones

So now that W Axl Brooks has had his bluff called and he's gone into a strop, does this mean that another band/act can have three gigs?

muddypaws

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

Peter Aiken, Garth Brooks, Peter McKenna (Director of Croke Park), Paraic Duffy ( Director General of the GAA) all state that Owen Keegan, right up until July 2nd, gave no indication that he was unhappy with the efforts of either Croke Park (with regards to the additionality of addressing the concerns of the residents) or with Peter Aiken, during either informal discussions or during the statutory meetings which had been held at various points after the event management plan was submitted, and then:

On July 1st: this story breaks.

On July 2nd: Owen Keegan phones Aiken and refuses to licence two of the concerts.

Coincidence? I think not.

But even if that was what happened, whats your point? So DCC did see there was an issue, so tried to come up with a solution that everyone could work with, hoping the residents would accept 3 as a compromise instead of 5, and so not go to court to get an injunction. They just can't win with you in any way.

Uriel.

bumper234 wrote: »

To all of the GB fans whinging about the Croke park residents objecting to concerts and continuously saying things like "Well Marley park holds concerts and their residents don't mind"

I'll just leave this here for your perusal

http://gometro.ie/2014/07/marlay-residents-seek-concert-cap/

Seems like jumping on the bandwagon to me.

bumper234

Uriel. wrote: »

Seems like jumping on the bandwagon to me.

Or


Ye know,


They actually are sick of thousands of people streaming past their homes, Traffic blocking up the streets, Noise, Litter, Anti social behaviour....the usual stuff.:rolleyes: