Seriously lockjaw, the lads might all have to go
on the couch for a few one on one sessions before
the 24th May. ;)

TheGateKeeper (Tyrone) - Posts: 2843 - 26/04/2013 15:51:10    1374429

Seriously lockjaw, the lads might all have to go
on the couch for a few one on one sessions before
the 24th May. ;)

TheGateKeeper (Tyrone) - Posts: 2843 - 26/04/2013 15:52:03    1374431

MuckrossHead
County: Donegal
Posts: 1086

Seany
The reason the authorities found as they did was that "the infraction as alleged was not proven" It doesn't mean he did, it doesn't mean he didn't. They are however quite right in their assertion that you can't convict a player without compelling proof & they felt that the evidence as presented fell short of the required standard.
Now what I would ask you to do is take that standard of compelling proof & apply it to your post which is as hopeless a mishmash of conspiracy theories, inaccuracies & libels as I have ever read.
How anyone could apply Occam's razor to the convoluted mess that you present as a case is laughable.
I will say again, I wish Kevin O'Brien well in the future & look forward to meeting Dublin later in the year.

On your first point, the first time you have said as much if i remember correctly, albiet paraphrasing the CCCC, i fully agree and would go to such an extent to say that without evidence no-one had any idea of what, or indeed, if anything happened at all. For people like ourselves there was probably as much chance of either possibility being true as neither of us had anything to back up our opinions with. However, as ive stated before, you have consistently omitted the possibility that Donegal may, not have i add sternly, but may of conducted foul play. Not to include such a possibility is in my opinion severe bias.

The rest of your post is in my view mere hyperbole and there's no point addressing it as we will never agree. In any instance, the case is dealt with and both counties have bigger fish to fry in the short term.

As a side note, id urge Dublin supporters to show their support for KOB on Sunday!

seany16 (Dublin) - Posts: 1663 - 26/04/2013 16:05:17    1374445

Not at all. Jimmy can make the lads climb Errigal to get the heads cleared if needs be!

Lockjaw (Donegal) - Posts: 10369 - 26/04/2013 16:08:01    1374449

Its old news now lads and McBrearty has shown in the U-21 champioship it hasn't affectd him and hopefully O'Brien can do the same. Even if O'Brien did bite him, I feel sorry for him as a young player as I think he has been let down by his county board letting the circus go on for longer than it needed.

Also as emerging rivals on the field with the last two All-Irelands between them, the semi in 2011, U-21 final in 2010, the relegation decider a few weeks back and now this incident - its all adding the flavour of a potential mega-clash in the summer!

SeanieSense (Donegal) - Posts: 328 - 26/04/2013 16:16:54    1374456

first off, i m a complete neutral.. But anyone who knows anything, knows the truth here.. I think i d be closing the thread and not discussing this, as we know someone got lucky here.. We call our sport a mans game, and look down on soccer. Yet look at the outrage in england at the min over the same type thing. Whats a gaa response? Try appeal and get off on a loop hole.. ask either player face to face what happened and look into their eyes. One is plainly not telling the truth..

old yellar (None) - Posts: 2654 - 26/04/2013 16:21:14    1374464

Try appeal and get off on a loop hole.. ask either player face to face what happened and look into their eyes. One is plainly not telling the truth..
This is the best one yet
A brilliant summary of what the actual facts of the case are oldyellar. Ha ha loop hole. There is no loop hole to 'innocent till proven guilty'. I'm not sure if you actually grasp what a loop hole
Ask either player face to face and look into their eyes, god why don't they do the same in all murder trials, we'd get a guilty verdict everytime. So what you're saying is, you would base a verdict based on how they reacted when they looked at the plaintiff/defendant when they try to tell their side of the story. So what happens if the people in question have nervous ticks or can't stop blinking their eyes. Ah ha ha, its so sad that it pains you that he got off

keithlemon (Australia) - Posts: 920 - 26/04/2013 16:36:17    1374480

Try appeal and get off on a loop hole.. ask either player face to face what happened and look into their eyes. One is plainly not telling the truth..

__________


There is a massive difference between what happened in the Liverpool and CSKA London game and what happened in the Donegal v Dublin game. For example, TV cameras clearly show Luis Suarez biting Ivanovic, There is simply no defence for Luis Suarez. He did it, Its clear to see for millions of people all over the world.

Compare that with what happened in the other game. Nobody saw it. Now does that mean it didnt happen ? No it doesnt. What it means is that there is absolutely nothing to show who did it.

Now i'm sorry, But everyone is innocent until proven guilty - Kevin O'Brien was handed a proposed ban because the CCCC made a judgement based on "the people they interviewed"

I use the example of court of law, If someone got stabbed in the street and died, and everyone was interviewed by the police, Could the police charge and convict a person with absolutely no evidence except for a a laceration and peoples word ? Absolutely not. They would have to try find more evidence than hearsay and a wound.

Hence, Kevin O'Briens case was struck out. There was simply no clearcut evidence.

waynoI (Dublin) - Posts: 13659 - 26/04/2013 17:07:39    1374512

very good keithlemon
link

TheGateKeeper (Tyrone) - Posts: 2843 - 26/04/2013 17:11:09    1374517

waynoI
County: Dublin
Posts: 5470

1374512 Try appeal and get off on a loop hole.. ask either player face to face what happened and look into their eyes. One is plainly not telling the truth..

__________


Compare that with what happened in the other game. Nobody saw it. Now does that mean it didnt happen ? No it doesnt. What it means is that there is absolutely nothing to show who did it.

The above is partially correct imo. Of course, its true to say that just because there is no evidence it doesn't mean that nothing happened. Something may of happened, but there is also just as much chance with no evidence that nothing happened. How are we to know when or where a bruise/laceration appeared on a players arm? How are we to know people are giving factual accounts? We don't but people under the influence of bias have practical asserted and believed with certainty that he was indeed bitten. The conflicting reports in my view suggest someone is not conceling the entire facts but an opinion that remains as ive nothing to back it up. I'd also argue that, in light of no medical evidence coming into the public domain and two conflicting reports from both camps that the assumption that a player was bitten was taken too lightly as well.

I hope in the future there is more transparacy in relation to these issues as trial by hearsay is not good enough. I think the incident has left a sour taste in both counties and i hope that what was building into a potentially healthy rivalry isn't spoiled as a result. But i've built my bridge and have walked over it in hope that if we meet in the summer the football will do the talking!

seany16 (Dublin) - Posts: 1663 - 26/04/2013 17:49:40    1374556

Something may of happened, but there is also just as much chance with no evidence that nothing happened. How are we to know when or where a bruise/laceration appeared on a players arm? How are we to know people are giving factual accounts? We don't but people under the influence of bias have practical asserted and believed with certainty that he was indeed bitten. The conflicting reports in my view suggest someone is not conceling the entire facts but an opinion that remains as ive nothing to back it up. I'd also argue that, in light of no medical evidence coming into the public domain and two conflicting reports from both camps that the assumption that a player was bitten was taken too lightly as well.

Well said seany, the perfect post to close out this thread

keithlemon (Australia) - Posts: 920 - 27/04/2013 09:50:11    1374598

Lads, I posted a couple of times on this topic.

I said the whole McBrearty story didn't add up. Plus there was a lack of evidence to prove O'Brien done what he had been accused of. Looking into peoples eyes and asking are they guilty isn't a conclusive legal argument, mainly because people can just lie! So evidence based trials still exist in the Western World.

Another poster said he had a mate in the Donegal dressing room after the game who said McBrearty had been bit. I know someone in the Dublin changing room who said O'Brien was disgusted by the accusation of biting and was distraught and categorically denied the accusation. But again....that means absolutely nothing!

Where was the evidence??? McBrearty accused O'Brien of biting him......he had no evidence except a bruise. Now to be honest, it was all a bit silly. Now some posters who assumed O'Brien was guilty on accusation and thought he should be hanged for an act that the CCCC had no evidence he actually committed have somehow managed to turn this into......the CCCC had no evidence and that means that he probably did bite him???

Im sorry lads, there was no clear cut evidence that O'Brien bit anybody. Therefore he is innocent of the accusation. Now if the CCCC want to investigate if McBrearty lied.....best of luck to them. But again...theres no evidence to prove that. That does not mean McBrearty is a fibber.....or that hes telling the truth. We shall never know. But what I do know is O'Brien is innocent of an alleged offence. INNOCENT.

And lastly, to the posters that say the county board in Dublin should have dealt with it internally and acted shamefully......whats your basis for this argument?

Dublin management and county board basically kept their mouths shut, as procedure asks. O'Brien was accused, requested a hearing....and presented evidence that obviously countered that accusation. Why would the Dublin county board punish a guy when he says hes innocent and theres no evidence he actually done anything? That would be madness.

JayP (Dublin) - Posts: 1772 - 27/04/2013 10:03:18    1374600

Keithlemon, I dont think that the GAA would be in the business of releasing a picture of a photo of a bruise, laceration, whatever. It wouldnt exactly be marketing the game. However, I do agree that this case has been dealt with properly. Without the appropriate witnesses, there is nothing to back up a case except the word of one man against another.

Donegalman (None) - Posts: 3858 - 27/04/2013 10:19:24    1374605

http://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/gaa/officials-fume-as-obrien-escapes-three-game-ban-229675.html

Officials fume as O'Brien escapes three-game ban
Saturday, April 27, 2013
GAA officials were fuming yesterday as the disciplinary case against Dublin footballer Kevin O'Brien collapsed because of the absence of key witness Paddy McBrearty of Donegal at Thursday night's Central Hearings Committee meeting.

O'Brien was accused of biting McBrearty in a recent Allianz League Division 1 game in Ballybofey, after which the Donegal player was brought to Letterkenny General Hospital for medical treatment.

Though Dublin rejected suggestions McBrearty had been bitten, with county chairman Andy Kettle stating the Dublin team medic had suggested the wound was "a bruise, not a laceration," the case eventually reached the Central Competitions Controls Committee (CCCC).

Last week that committee proposed a three-game ban for the Dublin defender after their investigation into the allegations, but O'Brien chose not to accept the ban for what the CCCC suggested was a Category Three offence and duly appealed.

His appeal went to the CHC this week, but while that meeting was attended by Donegal GAA officials and medical staff, without McBrearty the case could not be pursued, which means O'Brien escapes the three-game ban and could figure this weekend.

Under the GAA's disciplinary procedures the matter cannot be revisited and O'Brien is free to play for the rest of the summer, despite a GAA committee finding him guilty of the offence.

There was a strong sense within the GAA of an opportunity lost regarding the case.

In recent weeks other sports have had high-profile disciplinary controversies, from Munster's Paul O'Connell escaping disciplinary action after kicking Dave Kearney of Leinster, to another biting incident involving Luis Suarez of Liverpool in the English Premier League last weekend. The Liverpool player was given a 10-game ban by the FA and fined by his club this week.

The O'Brien-McBrearty case was seen within the GAA hierarchy as a chance to make a strong stand on discipline. While Thursday evening's events may raise questions about the efficiency of the association's disciplinary procedures, the sense of official frustration within the GAA stems from the fact that the CCCC accepted the substantive charge of biting, and the CHC has had to quash the ban based on a technicality.

RMDrive (Donegal) - Posts: 2202 - 27/04/2013 10:22:33    1374607

Lads, we need to draw line under this and move on, it is beyond ridiculus at this stage.. Whether or not this incident happened, their is simply no evidence to clarify or deny this, and hence no action will be taken.. Thats it guys, both players will have moved on now, we all need to also...

81DLSAM (Donegal) - Posts: 281 - 27/04/2013 11:18:49    1374629

Lads, we need to draw line under this and move on, it is beyond ridiculus at this stage.. Whether or not this incident happened, their is simply no evidence to clarify or deny this, and hence no action will be taken.. Thats it guys, both players will have moved on now, we all need to also...

_________

A man speaking a bit of sense !!

It's done, No bad blood between the sides. Move on.......

waynoI (Dublin) - Posts: 13659 - 27/04/2013 11:23:42    1374631

McBrearty non appearance at the appeal should be enough for posters to realise,somebody is telling porkys.

D5dub (Dublin) - Posts: 283 - 27/04/2013 20:32:38    1374864

Indeed, it's obvious to anyone with a semblance of cop-on that O'Brien (backed by the Dublin management and county board) is telling the porkies. The very fact that he got off on a technicality on appeal, because McBrearty did not want to attend the circus that is the CHC, speaks volumes. The CCCC found that he had a case to answer and imposed the maximum ban the law book can apply (3 games - which needs to be looked at as it is not near severe enough for such a disgusting act as biting another player).

It's easy for Dubliner posters to say let's move on, if the shoe was on the other foot I'd love to have heard their reactions, and I'm convinced the final outcome would have been much much different. This won't be forgotten. Shameful few weeks for the GAA

LetterkennyMan (Donegal) - Posts: 393 - 28/04/2013 10:55:32    1374945

Why didn't McBrearty show up? An accusation was made and then not followed up on which whatever way you want to dress it is bad form. Do you not think his account of events would be crucial to any ruling considering there is no footage of the incident? Now we'll never know what happened and O'Brien is labelled with this when maybe there was another explanation. And of course maybe there isn't but as I said we'll never know.

doublehop (Kildare) - Posts: 4172 - 28/04/2013 11:37:58    1374964

Every dog in the street in Dublin knows who bit him and it was not o'brien the player in question has history in this, he bit one of his own county team mates in a club match last year.

knowtherules (UK) - Posts: 181 - 28/04/2013 11:50:16    1374976