Paul Kimmage on Claire Byrne Live Monday 16th

All My Stars Aligned

PK constantly will interrupt, talk over and raise his voice should somebody question or disagree with him. He constantly will not let people ask or answer questions if he doesn't agree. The anger is never far from the surface. He has a massive persecution complex. He appears unable to control his emotion, not really great for a journalist. Personally, I would never agree to be interviewed by him (not that he or anybody else would want to interview me).

It's a shame because when you strip away all of this he is asking some questions that need to be asked but any good he is trying to achieve is getting drowned out by his behaviour. At this stage in his career, after receiving so may plaudits for his work on LA, work should not be such a battle for him. I really feel if he turned it down a few notches he would have far more success.

Sonny678

All My Stars Aligned wrote:

PK constantly will interrupt, talk over and raise his voice should somebody question or disagree with him. He constantly will not let people ask or answer questions if he doesn't agree. The anger is never far from the surface. He has a massive persecution complex. He appears unable to control his emotion, not really great for a journalist. Personally, I would never agree to be interviewed by him (not that he or anybody else would want to interview me).

All My Stars Aligned wrote:

It's a shame because when you strip away all of this he is asking some questions that need to be asked but any good he is trying to achieve is getting drowned out by his behaviour. At this stage in his career, after receiving so may plaudits for his work on LA, work should not be such a battle for him. I really feel if he turned it down a few notches he would have far more success.

Again. He's not an entertainer. His TV performances need to be more polished. But I still find him real and authentic on tv. I think he tells the truth. And again people dont like to hear the truth. Because the truth can be ugly and unpleasant at times . We want our sport men and women to be placed up on pedestals and to be adored. When someone questions a sportsperson achievements, the natural instincts and reaction of the sports fan is to defend the person or sports they love.

In Ireland we don't have a great history of dealing with whistle-blowers. And Kimmage is a sports whistle-blower of sorts. Great sports writing is edgy sometimes contervesial ,insightful and most importantly full of passion. Kimmage has all the above. I wish more journalist in sports and areas like politics where more like Kimmage.

Harrybelafonte

terrydel wrote: »

The point? Private education is a form of elitism, which I despise. Imho it leads to a highly entitled attitude in many of its alumni, the kind of attitude the allows a journalist turn up to a debate completely unprepared as if that is beneath him. Which again imho is what Fitzgerald did.
Hopefully that answers it for you.

Hey ho. Privately educated elitist here. I’ll be keeping a close eye on your posts so that I may improve myself along your esteemed principles.

ford2600

"No. A lot of it was the cost factor but at the end of the day, Stephen is only my brother, and I don't ever see him as anything other than that."

Taken from this interview (the interview is worth a read just for Vaughters take on why Dan Martin would be a better endurance athlete than Nicolas Roche)
http://www.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/cycling-upholding-his-familys-values-29365832.html


http://www.velonews.com/2011/02/news/complete-transcript-paul-kimmages-interview-of-floyd-landis_158328

There is no other sports journalist in Ireland doing interviews of this quality.

ford2600

terrydel wrote: »

GAA players and managers have an Everest sized chip on their shoulder, every sentence starts with 'we proved the doubters wrong' or words to that effect (well apart from 'look it....')

Did you play much team sports?

I played quite a few including, Gaelic football & rugby to a a half decent standard.

Every team I played in used as motivation in big games some perceived slight from opponents in previous encounters.

You really think it's unique to GAA?

As a for the "look it" comment. One of the worst offenders is a neighbour of mine, 22 year old college student. All star winner and 2nd favourite for hurler of the year. Not too sure how I would have handled my elocution in front of 70000 people, with my heart rate coming down from 160 or so while elated with scoring 2-2 in an all ireland semi final. How did you do with your public speaking at that age in front of those crowds?

Tombo2001

Sonny678 wrote: »

1 Agree about Farah. And of course Frome and sky cycling team have questions also . The reaction of the media and general public in Britain or should say lack of reaction or questioning of Farah and Froome is very disappointing. It's shows the Irish are not the only ones afraid to ask the tough questions.

2 Dublin have got criticism on boards regards finances. But in the main media there has been no criticism of finances. With the exception of Ewan McKenna no Irish journalist has criticised Dublins finances. The Sunday Game, national radio, national papers, ex players there is very little criticism of Dublins finances whatsoever. Compared to Tyrone ( puke football Donegal ( destroying soul of the GAA) Meath footballers ( GAA president criticisms and liveline phone on Meath wins). Compared to other counties Dublin have got no criticism. To say they have is a falsehood.

3 Dublin don't take it bad. Becuase there is very little criticism. Kimmage and Dunphy and that's it. This great Dublin team has been the most praised and lauded gaa team ever in the national media and TV. And Dublin not giving out. Well what about Jim Galvin giving out about Connolly suspension and the Sunday Game. That was very funny. That would be like the leader of North Korea saying the North Korean media give him a hard time. The media do not criticise Dublin. Forums yes, national media no. That's why Dublin are OK with criticism. When you receive feck all your not going to get to hot and bothered.

Two minute google search:

http://www.irishnews.com/sport/gaafootball/2016/02/10/news/enough-is-enough-in-terms-of-gaa-funding-for-dublin-413233/

http://www.irishmirror.ie/sport/gaa/gaa-defend-colossal-funding-given-5109614

http://www.hoganstand.com/Forum/MessagePage.aspx?PageNumber=1&TopicID=101675

https://www.rte.ie/sport/gaa/2016/0425/784105-dublin-gaa/

http://www.independent.ie/sport/gaelic-games/gaelic-football/everyone-looks-at-dublin-and-raises-an-eyebrow-at-their-cars-sean-cavanagh-35452588.html

I could go on.

There is been plenty of criticism of Dublin.

Its different to what you are talking about. People had a problem with Tyrone and Meath's style of play. They dont have a problem with Dublin's style of play. But people do have a problem with the perceived/ real advantages that Dublin has, and whether that gives them an unfair advantage.

Not everyone criticised Tyrone. A lot of people were delighted they beat Kerry. Pat Spillane wasnt, and even at the time it looked like sour grapes.

Kerry have sponsorship with Kerry Group that most other counties can only dream of. By contrast, for example Roscommon effectively dont have a sponsor. But people dont bang on about Kerry's financial advantage.

Weepsie

ford2600 wrote: »

"No. A lot of it was the cost factor but at the end of the day, Stephen is only my brother, and I don't ever see him as anything other than that."

Taken from this interview (the interview is worth a read just for Vaughters take on why Dan Martin would be a better endurance athlete than Nicolas Roche)
http://www.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/cycling-upholding-his-familys-values-29365832.html


http://www.velonews.com/2011/02/news/complete-transcript-paul-kimmages-interview-of-floyd-landis_158328

There is no other sports journalist in Ireland doing interviews of this quality.

He's not doing them himself anymore though it seems. Much of that is down to people not wanting to talk to him though I imagine.


Mod Mode -- Stop talking about Dublin/GAA etc etc. It's gone off topic.

Sonny678

Sorry again for going off topic a bit. But I am trying to explain Kimmage criticising the Dubs was an impressive piece of journalism. I would be grateful to the mod to allow me to have the right of reply to the above chaps message. Thanks. It is all part of trying to explain why Kimmage is a great journalist. Sorry for going off topic a bit.

Criticising Dublin which Kimmage did was impressive. Because Dublin get feck all criticism. His criticism was about Dublins style of play. Cynicism play at the end of the final. If that was any other county. They would have been heavily criticised. Yet if you were not at the final, you would not have known about Dublins cynicism. Because until Kimmage spoke out it was not even mentioned. For me this is classic Kimmage. He speaks his mind tells the truth . That is proper journalism.

Again sorry for going off topic. I would just be grateful to respond to the above message. Just trying to explain why criticising Dublin was again Kimmage standing out from the rest of the journalistic pack of nodding yes men.

Sorry but again Dublin get very little criticism compared to other counties. The examples above you gave are all years ago. You had to go back to Feb 17 for the last bit of criticism. Yes you get a solitary article once every couple of months in a publication or website. But that's it. That's not criticisim compared to tsunami of criticism that counties like Tyrone or Meath suffered. And still you cannot find any criticism the week after the final. For the exception of Kimmage there was none.

Ex players are reluctant to criticise Dublin . But also the GAA community are less likely to criticise Dublin. I think teams accepts when Dublin, kerry Galway and Cork win football and the big three in hurling win. But anyone outside the above and they are more critical of the winning team. Its like they accept Dublin Cork and Galway because they are most famous counties all political social and economic powerhouses. While when a county like Meath wins other counties look for excuses because all they see is a average midland county. So to say Dublin are criticised is beyond laughable. It's wrong.

Examples of different levels of criticism in GAA land. Galway in late 80s won 2 All Irelands with a short passing game /possession game that was widely criticised of ruining the game of hurling. Cork won 2 All Ireland In 04 05 with a more possession game that was seen as revolutionary and largely praised. Clare in the 90s in the hurling community were criticised for bringing to much of a physical game to hurling . Kilkenny under Cody brought an even more physical type of game to win All Irelands and they were seen as the greatest team ever. Tyrone were labelled as "puke football" . Tyrone were heavily criticised over sledging, blanket defence and other tactics. Donegal under Maginness were criticised for destroying gaelic football with an ultra blanket defences. While kerry won All Irekand in 14 with a blanket defence. They were praised.

Meath were heavily criticised in 80s 90s. With one particular article in a mainstream publication criticising Meath , the journalist had to be suspended after his comments. You had GAA presidents coming out and criticism and phone calls into lifeline after Meath wins. Which was unprecedented.

The 1988 Cork v Meath replay final was heavily criticised as a tough match. Yet in comparison to 83 final with Dublin v Galway, it was a very clean match. Meath were criticised for being too physical. Yet when Dublin won All Irelands in late 70s and 80s with a much more physical and violent approach they were lauded as one of the greatest teams ever . Mick Lyons was a choir boy compared to Sean Doherty. Look how Dublin nearly decapitated Mickey Ned Sullivan in 75 final. When Dublin won the 83 final with 12 men. It was the most violent and dangerous final in GAA history and probaly in Irish sporting history. They were called the 12 apostles by the media. If that was Meath Tyrone or Donegal team I would be certain they wouldn't be labelled as doing the work of God.

Regards Kerry and finances. Kerry have a good sponsorship deal. But Kerry co op was not pumping money into kerry when they won All Irelands in the 30s 40s 50s 60s 70s and 80s. Kerry have issues like emigration, rural depopulation and lack economic activity to deal with. Kerry won bucket loads of all Irelands when the country and county had no money. And they have to deal with the above social problems.

Kerrys extraordinary sucess is more based on producing football geniuses then finances eg Mick O Connell Mick Dwyer Mickey Sheedy Maurice Fitzgerald and Colm Cooper.
Seen kerry have won 37 and Dublin with all their advantages have only won really around 13 or 14.( All the All Irelands Dublin won up to 1958 where Dublin teams full of country lads. Dublin played an All Ireland final v kerry in early 40s . And the best Kerry footballer was playing for Dublin , while the best player on the field was a longford man playing Dublin).

With Dublin having so much advantages in terms of finance population and power, kerrys achievements in gaelic football are nothing short of extraordinary. They see Kerry as the Brazil of gaelic football. Kerry achievements are special. Dublin should be winning All Irelands with all their advantages and resources. And up to this decade Dublin were underachieving with 1 All Ireland In the 50s, 1 in the 60s, 3 in the 70s , 1 in the 80s , 1 in the 90s and no All Irelands in the noughties. It's only this decade backed by new structures, a growth in middle class people following Dublin south GAA and pumped to the limits with multi national and gaa millions, that Dublin have reached their potential. (Of course it would be unfair and wrong not to mention great managers eg Gilroy Galvin and a golden generation of players. But it must be said also this is very uncompetitive period in the game with so many strong counties at a very low ebb in this decade eg Meath Laois Armagh Down Derry Cork Galway Kildare Louth Westmeath etc.

With Dublin finances , the problem is they are not been criticised. It is that Dublins finances are rarely mentioned. The odd article in a publication once in a year is not criticisim. The Sunday Game is the main gaa media outlet. It loves contervesey. Yet not once has Dublins finances been mentioned. Dublin GAA is the greatest financial doping in Irish sport history. Dublin are not Man City they are Man City, PSG and Real Madrid rolled into one . Throughout the country in gaa land it is being debated, Dublins finances. But in the media it is rarely mentioned. With the exception of Off the Ball and Ewan Mckenna.For a amateur association, a professional team in everything but name being financed by multi national and gaamillions. You would think that such as issue would be debated regularly in the national press TV radio . Nope it's not.

And that's why Kimmage intervention is impressive. With so many ex gaa players and gaa pundits reluctant to criticise Dublin. So little negative comments in papers . Kimmage rightly criticising his own counties negative tactics was again good journalism.

Yes he is abrasive. But his contribution to one of the greatest and toughest sports in the world, cycling is very commendable. Bringing the issue of doping to the fore is hugely commendable.
And Kimmage trying to highlight issues in rugby is also a great service to that game. From whatever products or being misused in the game to future painkiller addiction amongst ex players. Kimmage highlighting the above is important for the well being and health of future rugby players.

LeoD

Not sure if PK's writing is all that good anymore when you consider a lot of his column isn't even written by him. Take this one on Colm Cooper a couple of weeks ago in the Sunday Independent. The column was just over 1,300 words - less than 600 were PK's. The content in red is other people's words.

EndaHonesty

LeoD wrote: »

Not sure if PK's writing is all that good anymore when you consider a lot of his column isn't even written by him. Take this one on Colm Cooper a couple of weeks ago in the Sunday Independent. The column was just over 1,300 words - less than 600 were PK's. The content in red is other people's words.

Has PK used "other people's words" much in previous columns?

Or is your whole long winded point based on one out of hundreds of columns?...

LeoD

EndaHonesty wrote: »

Or is your whole long winded point based on one out of hundreds of columns?...

59 words is long winded? Sorry if it took you so long to read.

NIMAN

Bang on Sonny678

I was at the Kerry v Donegal final a few years back and Donegal were slaughtered for their style of play that day, yet both teams more or less played the same way.

gordongekko

EndaHonesty wrote: »

Has PK used "other people's words" much in previous columns?

Or is your whole long winded point based on one out of hundreds of columns?...

Well he wrote the biography of Tony Cascarino and Matt Hampson so i suppose these are mostly other peoples words :P

LeoD

EndaHonesty wrote: »

Has PK used "other people's words" much in previous columns?

Or is your whole long winded point based on one out of hundreds of columns?...

One of my 59 words was "anymore" which would imply that previously I thought he was good but recently he seems to have developed a style where he uses a lot of unoriginal copy - book extracts, long quotes, etc - which leaves you reading an article where a lot of the content was written or said by other people. A quick check of 3 recent articles:

Is Colm Cooper's autobiography worth your hard-earned coin?
1,324 words / 587 not his

I am moved to tears when Dublin win - but how can I not cheer for Mayo next weekend?
1,171 words / 454 not his

There just might be a better way to win
1,300 words / 720 not his


I don't particularly like it when so many of his articles recently seem to contain as much copy by other sources than the writer himself. Is it okay to have that opinion or is PK some sort of demi-god to the cycling community who cannot be criticised?

Sonny678

LeoD wrote:

I don't particularly like it when so many of his articles recently seem to contain as much copy by other sources than the writer himself. Is it okay to have that opinion or is PK some sort of demi-god to the cycling community who cannot be criticised?

I would say Kimmage is heavily criticised . You can criticise him. Like so many. But I think it's undeserved. Majority of his articles are to long if anything. When he does one and one interviews. They are very very long. Also can be very insightful. He is one of the best at interviewing sports people. He gets better insights then the usual sporting journalist interviews.

CatFromHue

yeah his one on one's are very good. I read them even if I know nothing about the person being interviewed.

terrydel

EndaHonesty wrote: »

Has PK used "other people's words" much in previous columns?

Or is your whole long winded point based on one out of hundreds of columns?...

He has yes, I've stopped buying the Indo completely in the last few months (f**k DOB and his propaganda rags) but prior to that I'd buy it Sunday just for the sport and a lot of PK's latter columns would be very quote-heavy iirc. Its something I found myself remarking on and finding annoying, smacks a bit of laziness/lack of inpsiration/whatever.
I think he's brilliant, love his style, his rigid, unshakeable beliefs and his couldnt care what others think attitude, but I don't think hes on the level he used to be. Perhaps its just the fact he has to produce regular material now and thus the quality suffers. Prior to his return to the sindo he wasnt doing regularly weekly columns for a long time.

terrydel

ford2600 wrote: »

"No. A lot of it was the cost factor but at the end of the day, Stephen is only my brother, and I don't ever see him as anything other than that."

Taken from this interview (the interview is worth a read just for Vaughters take on why Dan Martin would be a better endurance athlete than Nicolas Roche)
http://www.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/cycling-upholding-his-familys-values-29365832.html


http://www.velonews.com/2011/02/news/complete-transcript-paul-kimmages-interview-of-floyd-landis_158328

There is no other sports journalist in Ireland doing interviews of this quality.

The landis interview was sensational.
There are no other Irish sports journalists capable of that kind of work in my mind, Ken Early and Dion Fanning are superb writers but not sure that kind of interview is their thing. Neil Francis has also become a very accomplished writer. There are few if any others I'd be interested in reading regardless of their sport.

Sonny678

I know what your saying about Fanning and Earley. But I think they both try to be a bit to smart for their own good. I find Fanning and Earley on the radio very good. But in the papers I found Fanning usually wrote about 3 or 4 subjects 1 Liverpool 2 Ferguson bullying other managers 3 Roy Keanes temper 4 And taking the piss out of Newcastle Utd. While his articles were well written. You would after reading his articles, be asking yourself what was he trying to say there. Earley is the same with long winded articles that try to be a bit to clever . Both I find much better commentators on radio talking about soccer. Then they really are very good.

Neil Francis sorry is another average rugby writer . I find the standard on writing about rugby appalling in this country. The writing is we will beat Wales, Gatland cannot manage , Scmidht is a great tactician, the team is great, even when we lose the team is great. Ex players seem to be very reluctant to criticise their ex team mates. When I want to read some rugby commentary, I usually read English or Welsh journalist. At least they have something interesting to say. And are not afraid to offend ex teammates or the rugby community in general. That's why when Kimmage comments on rugby cause so much conterversey. The lack of debate and proper commentary and deep analysis on rugby affairs in this country is very poor. That's why I think Fitzgerald might be good. He seems willing to talk about different parts of the game not usually talked about. And while Kimmage taught him a lesson in that interview. I think Fitzgerald has potential.

I found Nicholas Roches articles on the tour de France and cycling in general are very good and informative. Insightful stuff.

And just on the rugby commentary. People seem to be reluctant to criticise players. They all cannot be world class. Compared to soccer where there is a rigorous analysis. Martin O Neill relieves alot of negative comments because of his style of play. Which is functional and gets results. But is a very conservative style of football. You could say Joe Schmit has the very same rugby style play. Functional gets results but a very conservative style of play. The criticisms of Schmit are much more meeker and less then O Neill receives. While Scdmit has a better standard of player to pick from.
G Hook actually was good at the start of journalist career. At least he was willing to criticise. But then he became a parody of himself quoting Shakespeare and other nonsense.

brocbrocach

Sonny678 wrote: »

Neil Francis sorry is another average rugby writer . I find the standard on writing about rugby appalling in this country. The writing is we will beat Wales, Gatland cannot manage , Scmidht is a great tactician, the team is great, even when we lose the team is great. Ex players seem to be very reluctant to criticise their ex team mates. When I want to read some rugby commentary, I usually read English or Welsh journalist.

Agree with this much. Francis is appalling. The rotten formula of beginning an article with a nonsensical quote, (Toland I'm also looking at you) puts me off reading anything of theirs anymore.

Thud

On the Kimmage topic, has anyone read Barry Ryans book The Ascent, out a few weeks back?
Can't imagine Kelly is too impressed by it goes into a bit more detail on doping than Kimmage did in his book and has a few more recent quotes from Kimmage in it too: "I remember seeing Kelly's ass in the Tour of Britain in the showers.....Just black and blue from needles. He put some amount of **** through his system"

ford2600

terrydel wrote: »

Neil Francis has also become a very accomplished writer.

Ahem
http://m.independent.ie/sport/rugby/neil-francis-on-jonah-lomu-a-life-lost-needlessly-34222682.html

A complete spoofer.

Danny Lennon did a good review of that article from memory

Edit: there it is

https://sigmanutrition.com/an-open-letter-to-neil-francis-the-irish-independent-science-scaremongering-creatine/

Doc07

ford2600 wrote: »

Ahem
http://m.independent.ie/sport/rugby/neil-francis-on-jonah-lomu-a-life-lost-needlessly-34222682.html

A complete spoofer.

Danny Lennon did a good review of that article from memory

Edit: there it is

https://sigmanutrition.com/an-open-letter-to-neil-francis-the-irish-independent-science-scaremongering-creatine/

Don't know how I missed that one. I often buy the Sindo for the sport and used to like Fanning etc but that was one of the worst articles ever written. I like Francis on the radio but that was pure crap.

terrydel

Sonny678 wrote: »

I know what your saying about Fanning and Earley. But I think they both try to be a bit to smart for their own good. I find Fanning and Earley on the radio very good. But in the papers I found Fanning usually wrote about 3 or 4 subjects 1 Liverpool 2 Ferguson bullying other managers 3 Roy Keanes temper 4 And taking the piss out of Newcastle Utd. While his articles were well written. You would after reading his articles, be asking yourself what was he trying to say there. Earley is the same with long winded articles that try to be a bit to clever . Both I find much better commentators on radio talking about soccer. Then they really are very good.

Neil Francis sorry is another average rugby writer . I find the standard on writing about rugby appalling in this country. The writing is we will beat Wales, Gatland cannot manage , Scmidht is a great tactician, the team is great, even when we lose the team is great. Ex players seem to be very reluctant to criticise their ex team mates. When I want to read some rugby commentary, I usually read English or Welsh journalist. At least they have something interesting to say. And are not afraid to offend ex teammates or the rugby community in general. That's why when Kimmage comments on rugby cause so much conterversey. The lack of debate and proper commentary and deep analysis on rugby affairs in this country is very poor. That's why I think Fitzgerald might be good. He seems willing to talk about different parts of the game not usually talked about. And while Kimmage taught him a lesson in that interview. I think Fitzgerald has potential.

I found Nicholas Roches articles on the tour de France and cycling in general are very good and informative. Insightful stuff.

And just on the rugby commentary. People seem to be reluctant to criticise players. They all cannot be world class. Compared to soccer where there is a rigorous analysis. Martin O Neill relieves alot of negative comments because of his style of play. Which is functional and gets results. But is a very conservative style of football. You could say Joe Schmit has the very same rugby style play. Functional gets results but a very conservative style of play. The criticisms of Schmit are much more meeker and less then O Neill receives. While Scdmit has a better standard of player to pick from.
G Hook actually was good at the start of journalist career. At least he was willing to criticise. But then he became a parody of himself quoting Shakespeare and other nonsense.

Ha, great summation of fanning and his favoured subject matter there!
Not sure if you know, but he is a red himself, his dislike of Houllier and devotion to Rafa was extraordinary, he was still blaming GH for things a decade afetr leaving, and was steadfast in his belief that Rafa was a better coach than Jose mourinho, which even the most fervant red cant honestly agree with.
But his 'week that was' column was often genius imho, often well above the standard of even the best columnists.
The media here is a complete fanboy to rugby, for me because our media (particularly the IT) aims squarely at the middle-class types who tend to follow rugby, particularly in Leinster. It also gives them a celebrity culture to create, closest thing they have to PL footballers on their doorstep. Every player is a 'legend' as soon as they play for Ireland, regardless of hat little they achieve.
I cant stand Hook, hes an obnoxious bigot and I cant get past that when judging him.
Anyway, the more Kimmage or those like him the better for me.

Oh, and Im not a red myself, Evertonian all the way

terrydel

ford2600 wrote: »

Ahem
http://m.independent.ie/sport/rugby/neil-francis-on-jonah-lomu-a-life-lost-needlessly-34222682.html

A complete spoofer.

Danny Lennon did a good review of that article from memory

Edit: there it is

https://sigmanutrition.com/an-open-letter-to-neil-francis-the-irish-independent-science-scaremongering-creatine/

I hadnt read that one, I do think he bangs on about the drug/sports science side too much without being an expert on it. I just think his writing style and prose has improved massively since I started reading his work.
As I said, not bought the indo in a few months now, and wont be going back.

Stoner

Sonny678 wrote:

Its was mentioned. But it was not criticised. There's a difference.

You are missing the point Sonny. There was some pulling to the ground,
However it was handled with cards etc. That might not be enough punishment. You are leaving out a lot of sources of criticism too, it's not a fact.

Also
1) the time was added on, punishment handed out
2) the mayo keeper put the ball out over the line anyway
3) mayo lads broke the rules with Rocks last free, they were both at it


I agree it was cynical play, and both sides were at it, it's called cynical play there are precise rules for it and they were applied.

I don't subscribe to the theory that such actions carried out by GAA players is the same level as taking drugs as he Imo attempted to do.

One action was punished on the spot within the rules. Drug taking goes undetected.

Forget the fact that it's too different sports.

For a minute, we don't need to confuse the issue, lets compare the "crimes"

GAA players can take performance enhancing drugs, that's the comparison to make. Compare a drug taking cyclist to a drug taking GAA player.

And compare a rider holding back or pulling another rider off his bike to what the Dublin players did

Don't as kimmage did half attempted try to say cheating is all the same thing .

Ask him he he'd like to replace his drug taking actions to holding another rider back (widespread in cycling), he would imo.

I use to enjoy reading kimmage's stuff since his documentary and seeing him here I think he needs help.
He's just looking for attention imo.

He had a go at the Dublin players called them cheats , and other stuff about how they gave nothing away and show no emotion. He gets to say all that, complain about getting nothing to write about so he goes at it from another angle.

Yet to top it all off he told Luke he should have called him on the phone and told him that to his face, but he's allowed print his opinions of others, but you need to "pick up the phone" if you have an issue with him.

He came across as a hypocrite in how he sees cheating and how he gives and takes criticism.
He wiped the floor with nobody Imo and came out on the wrong side of it.

ThisRegard

terrydel wrote: »

Neil Francis has also become a very accomplished writer.

That's exactly what Kimmage claimed last time I heard him on radio. He said it probably because the two of them were becoming convergent.

Sonny678

Stoner wrote:

You are missing the point Sonny. There was some pulling to the ground, However it was handled with cards etc. That might not be enough punishment. You are leaving out a lot of sources of criticism too, it's not a fact.

I put this as simply as I can.Kerry did the same to Mayo in 14 semi final. Mayo would have done the same if they were in Dublins position. Every county would have the same as Dublin. Cynical play is part and parcel of every sports game. Every great team in every sport has been Cynical sometime.

The problem if it that was any other team it would have criticised more.
The Sunday Game which loves contervesey like the above. Didn't not even criticise the incidents but did even not mention it. In the week after the final with the exception of Joe Molloy on Off the Ball it wasn't even mentioned. Can you show any criticism of Dublins tactics before Kimmage spoke up. No. Only until Kimmage brought it up was it discussed. If Meath Tyrone Donegal footballers or Waterford or Clare hurlers did the same thing. They would have been crucified. There has been a couple of issues with Dublin in the last few years. Eg three biting incidents and they were also sweeped under the carpet. My favourite quote was when a Dublin player bit an opponents on the football field for the second time in a couple of seasons. The Dublin player bit the players hand. The response of a Sunday Game pundit , was well if you have a finger around a man's mouth what do you think he's going to do with it, but bite it off.

If you want to say Dublin are criticised by the media if would be like saying Daily Telegraph or Daily Mail criticise the tories in England. It just doesn't happen. If you want to believe Dublin are criticised like other counties. You are 100% wrong. Kimmage can be abrasive and a bit hot tempered. But this shouldn't be used as stick to beat him. He tells the truth when so many are to afraid in case they upset vested interests.

Sonny678

terrydel wrote:

Ha, great summation of fanning and his favoured subject matter there! Not sure if you know, but he is a red himself, his dislike of Houllier and devotion to Rafa was extraordinary, he was still blaming GH for things a decade afetr leaving, and was steadfast in his belief that Rafa was a better coach than Jose mourinho, which even the most fervant red cant honestly agree with. But his 'week that was' column was often genius imho, often well above the standard of even the best columnists. The media here is a complete fanboy to rugby, for me because our media (particularly the IT) aims squarely at the middle-class types who tend to follow rugby, particularly in Leinster. It also gives them a celebrity culture to create, closest thing they have to PL footballers on their doorstep. Every player is a 'legend' as soon as they play for Ireland, regardless of hat little they achieve. I cant stand Hook, hes an obnoxious bigot and I cant get past that when judging him. Anyway, the more Kimmage or those like him the better for me.

Fanning is a good columnist. Yes the Rafa is the greatest thing since sliced bread and Ferguson was some sort of evil bully was his main subject . Ferguson teams played brillant football something he never seemed to realise. While Rafas teams were very boring and conservative and awful to watch. But he could never take of his auld pool blinkers. But he is a good columnist. But just needs to talk about a couple more things.

I don't know. I just love reading about rugby. All sports really. But I just find the standard of rugby journalism in this country is so poor eg all players are great and have no weakness. I find The Sunday Times is good for rugby. Just keep away from ex Irish players. They are so afraid to say anything negative about the current team. Maybe Donnacha O Callaghan could be a good columnist. Anytime he talks about rugby he is more honest in his appraisal. That's why Kimmages comments are so explosive in rugby. When you have very little criticism in any field or of any subject , when then there is criticism it does not go down well. That's why Kimmage criticisms of rugby and Dublin went down like a lead balloon.

Tombo2001

Sonny678 wrote: »

I put this as simply as I can.Kerry did the same to Mayo in 14 semi final. Mayo would have done the same if they were in Dublins position. Every county would have the same as Dublin. Cynical play is part and parcel of every sports game. Every great team in every sport has been Cynical sometime.

The problem if it that was any other team it would have criticised more.
The Sunday Game which loves contervesey like the above. Didn't not even criticise the incidents but did even not mention it. In the week after the final with the exception of Joe Molloy on Off the Ball it wasn't even mentioned. Can you show any criticism of Dublins tactics before Kimmage spoke up. No. Only until Kimmage brought it up was it discussed. If Meath Tyrone Donegal footballers or Waterford or Clare hurlers did the same thing. They would have been crucified. There has been a couple of issues with Dublin in the last few years. Eg three biting incidents and they were also sweeped under the carpet. My favourite quote was when a Dublin player bit an opponents on the football field for the second time in a couple of seasons. The Dublin player bit the players hand. The response of a Sunday Game pundit , was well if you have a finger around a man's mouth what do you think he's going to do with it, but bite it off.

If you want to say Dublin are criticised by the media if would be like saying Daily Telegraph or Daily Mail criticise the tories in England. It just doesn't happen. If you want to believe Dublin are criticised like other counties. You are 100% wrong. Kimmage can be abrasive and a bit hot tempered. But this shouldn't be used as stick to beat him. He tells the truth when so many are to afraid in case they upset vested interests.

I posted a heap of links the other day showing criticism of Dublin.