The Dominance of Dublin GAA *Mod warning post#1*

RoyalCelt wrote: »

I used to rub my hands as a meath man at the thought of playing Dublin in croker.. Doesn't mean Dublin didn't have the home town advantage that would have been the difference on a few occasions.

nerd69 wrote: »

Both can be true to be fair wanting to play barca at the nou camp doesn't mean they don't have an advantage there.

With regards the build a bigger stadium in Meath comment it's all gaa funded one of the big gripes here is dublins extra funding I'm.unsure what your trying.to.do.with that comment

ArielAtom wrote: »

I’m not sure that some posters have grasped the facts that is was sports Ireland’s funding and not the GAA. But hey, let them live in their own little universe. I do like the idea of the wet pub celebration.

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

Home advantage is a home advantage. It doesn't matter if you win lose or draw, a team gains a benefit from playing 90% of their matches in the same stadium.

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

Home advantage is a home advantage. It doesn't matter if you win lose or draw, a team gains a benefit from playing 90% of their matches in the same stadium.

Dublin reached 2 Leinster finals and a League semi in the late 80s \ early 90s under Lar Foley.

Teams come and go. Where was the moneyball effect in the last few seasons since they won the League in 2011 and Leinster in 2013?

They should have been on an inexorable upwards curve due to the #moneyball# effect. But nope...

Guess the #moneyball# effect isn't much of an effect.

Why should they be on inexorable upwards curve? Dublin hurlers were minnows prior to the funding, losing to Westmeath and Laois and getting regular beatings. That's completely changed post funding. Not just with the National league and Leinster title but with regularly competing at the top table. It all stemmed from the huge improvements in underage results and seeing the club game transformed. Money doesn't guarantee success but it goes a long way, especially in an amateur sport.

Yeah, how about responding to the actual points I made?

Dublin reached 2 Leinster finals and a League semi in the late 80s \ early 90s under Lar Foley.

Teams come and go. Where was the moneyball effect in the last few seasons since they won the League in 2011 and Leinster in 2013?

They should have been on an inexorable upwards curve due to the #moneyball# effect. But nope...

Weren't they beaten by Laois in recent memory? And getting hidings in championships?

Guess the #moneyball# effect isn't much of an effect.

Hurling teams are apparently meant to be locked into whatever status they have ever had and no teams can rise and fall ever.

Sure why would anyone ever bother playing it.

I did respond to the points you made, I picked them apart.

The improvement of Dublin senior hurlers came from the talent that came through at underage. Post funding, Dublin have won around 10 underage hurling titles, they barely won any in the 40 years prior to that. A dramatic change and clearly the finance had a major part to play.

The same as in club hurling, a Dublin club has never won a club All Ireland, 2 were won recently. Of course, the improvements were made across the board in Dublin GAA, this all happened post funding increase but you want to claim that's all a coincidence?

You did no such thing, trotting out the same old nonsense about Laois.

Are Dublin hurlers not allowed to reach a Leinster championship final ever?

Are they not allowed to beat Laois ever? Should that be enshrined in the GAA constitution?

Are Laois not allowed to improve or disimprove?

Are 'minnows' always to be minnows? Do we lock in the status quo of teams as they were in 2000, for the rest of the century?

I guess those at the top of the status quo would like that.

Apparently money only ever gets raised when they reach the finals & beat Laois, and is forgotten in all the years when they don't. I guess the money works sometimes, and not others. Or maybe it's not really the money.

Because it's a pretty faulty explanation that is wrong far more times than it is right.

So it's not much of an explanation.

Dublin's results have to do with the numbers of people playing hurling, and the complex outcome of sporting events which no one can really explain.

They are playing in the home of the GAA. It's not reserved for the exclusive use of Dublin the way that the Nou Camp is for Barcelona.

So no, they are not playing at home as it would be understood in other sports.

The millions of euro of funding only ever explains why Dublin beat Laois, never why they lose.

It's neither necessary nor sufficient as an explanation for how Dublin fare when it comes to taking home medals and championships.

In 1991 Dublin lost a Leinster final to Kilkenny by 2 points, tonight they lost by 9 points. Where's the moneyball effect?

The millions of euro of funding was to keep the GAA alive in the capital city of its home country versus the inroads of soccer and rugby, in terms of participation.

Dublin needs more funding to put programmes in place that in other counties happens naturally \ through social networks.

There are small parishes in the country with more pitches than Dublin 1 despite vast population differences, for example.

Dublin senior footballers have played every home championship game bar 1 in Croke Park for at least the last 50 years. Croke Park is in Dublin, they are playing at home.

The millions of euro explains the improvements in results across the board. Another example would be Ladies football. Dublin never won an All Ireland prior to funding, they have now won 5 All Irelands since the millions were pumped in.

But this is just the obvious conclusion to a one county only scheme. Results are bound to improve if one county has their own coaching and development plan structured and paid for to to tune of millions. The thing is, the huge number of titles gained from it is not the point, it's that the governing body of our games decided to fund one county at the cost of all others. It was a disgraceful move.

Every county has issues, many had far more than Dublin. For example, at the time this fund was granted, 6 of our counties were emerging from a 30 year war, a huge amount of the population in their counties were openly hostile to Gaelic Games, some members were beaten and murdered for playing our games. Why do you think Dublin deserved their own scheme but these counties didn't?

Obviously, if you can't even admit that playing in Croke Park is a home game for Dublin then you're not going to acknowledge the dramatic improvements the millions of euro has produced for Dublin GAA. Some people still argue that the world is flat, I suppose.

So Dublin are playing at home when they play in Croke park, glad we got that sorted.

Yes and Dublin ladies never won an All Ireland in the 40 years prior to funding. It's such a familiar pattern, Dublin never won an u21 football All Ireland prior to funding either, as noted, a Dublin hurling club never won an All Ireland pre funding. Then huge improvements in results at minor level in football and hurling, u21 football and hurling, senior football and hurling and of course club football and hurling.

When you pump millions of euros into one county to develop players, this is the obvious result. That's why the focus is on Dublin. The winning of titles is not the issue, it's that it was done unfairly. I know you won't admit it but if you had won titles without the funding then it would have been far more satisfactory. All the titles are at the very least tainted and some would go further than that.