Still no team but everyone’s tipping us to win tonight

I hope they don’t run out of programmes too early at O’Moore Park this evening (throw-in time 7 pm) as it now looks as if we’ll be turning up in that Midlands meeting place without having a bull’s notion as to what our lineup will be. BJ, Chris Barrett, Seamus O’Shea, Mickey Mullins and Mort are all doubtful and we’ve no idea what the crack is with the Ballina returnees but at this late stage I suppose there’s nothing for it but to wait and see what kind of team trots out on the pitch in a few hours from now.

The good news from our perspective is that everyone – and I mean everyone – thinks we’ll win tonight. By “everyone”, I’m talking about the Indo, the Times, RTE, Hogan Stand and Paddy Power. Even the lads on the Laoistalk message board seem fairly downbeat about their own chances, with 60% of them opting for us in a poll on the likely outcome. There’s confidence for you: imagine what the outcome would have been if they’d got sight of our team.

Back later (or early tomorrow) with the usual mixture of words, pics and video clips from the game.

4 thoughts on “Still no team but everyone’s tipping us to win tonight

  1. Willie Joe, I’m a little bit disappointed to read that the discussions on seem to have ruffled your feathers somewhat, to borrow a phrase from yourself.
    I have contributed to that thread and I really can’t see what has upset you.
    My own mention of you was as follows:
    “Willie Joe’s style of writing is enjoyable to read and I think he must have a lot of time on his hands. I like to visit his site after every Mayo match to get his take on the proceedings.”

    That amounts to a total of three points and I can’t accept that any of them is offensive or derogatory in any way.
    Another poster developed my second point somewhat when he wrote:

    “if i can add one thing maybe though, the guy who does the mayogaablog is one dedicated fella..there appears to be not one match he misses!!”
    His other point, in the same post, summed up the gist of my earlier contribution and was widely mirrored by several others:

    “whether we agree or disagree with his views, then thats another thing…..but theyre free to be expressed!”

    Out of a total of 27 posts, only 11 made any reference to you of any sort. Six can most definitely be construed as favourable, two are very qualified in their disagreement with your analysis of one player in a particular game.
    A grand total of three can be said to take issue with you, on the same matter.
    That disagreement related to one aspect of your Mayo v. Laois assessment and that was your rating of Liam O’Malley’s performance.
    I repeat that only three posters took issue with you on this point; in other words, the overwhelming majority of post that made any reference to you at all was supportive of your right to express your opinions and most, including me, were complimentary of your general writings.
    The thread, after the first couple of posts, strayed away from the topic starter in question. This happens with all topics on our little board. We very quickly revert to discussing matters that we consider ourselves to be expert at -“helping” O’Mahony to get on with the business of selecting a side for the upcoming championships and solving his problems around the field
    So it has been and so it probably will remain.
    As some one who admits to enjoying your match reports, I’m disappointed to feel that you are not prepared to give us on the same right to freedom of expression that nobody on the thread in question appears to deny to you.
    If, as you state, you are getting thoroughly pissed off with what has been written about you on, I’d respectfully suggest that your problem may very well be caused by something else.
    Maybe you should go see a urologist and leave us to get on with our deliberations.

  2. Hi Lar

    Thanks for your comment. I’ve seen and enjoyed your frequent perceptive comments on the board. This time, however, I think you’ve missed the point somewhat, in a number of respects.

    First, the thing that irked me was that a discussion developed (and, say what you like, it did start in a critical manner) on another forum about what I was saying on the site. I would have thought that if anyone was that bothered about what I had to say that they would be prepared to post a comment here where I could at least have the opportunity to debate the point directly. A few people (one of which seemed to be a cut and paste from a comment on the board) did and I responded to them.

    Second, I did attempt to clarify my position midweek (at more than a 1,000 miles remove, it all felt a bit little megaphone diplomacy) and made it abundantly clear that I bore no personal grudge against any player (a point which should, in any case, have been self-evident had anyone carefully read what I’d written). What annoyed me was that, having done so, some other guy then chimed in with another claim that I had a grudge, once again without giving me the chance to respond.

    Lar, I have no problem with you guys having all the freedom of expression you want on the board and I frequently enjoy reading what you have to say. I don’t, as you allege, want to deny you any freedom to say what you want, when you want and about who you want.

    Also I don’t understand your penultimate point about what’s causing “my problem”. The issue I have is as I’ve put it, i.e. that allegations were being made about the motives for what I was saying on a separate forum and not directly to me. I accept and appreciate the point you make about the positive contributions made about the site on the thread but go back and look at the first few posts again and you’ll see what I mean.

    Re your final point, my waterworks are all working fine and dandy, thanks very much. Oh and I don’t have THAT much time on my hands – I have three young kids and, like everyone else, I need to work for a living. I just type fast!

    Thanks again for taking the time to provide the feedback and for your kind comments about the site. At the end of the day, once the team is on the field, we’re all on the same side.

    All the best


  3. Hi WJ,
    Thanks for your speedy reply and I’m glad there appears to be no acrimony between us and our respective viewpoints.
    If I may, I’d like to respond to some of your latest points briefly and I’ve no intention whatever of developing a flaming match. I hope to join in on your discussions again, if and when, the need arises and there is nothing personal in what I have or will, write.
    To begin then at the end, as is logical and customary with all followers of Mayo football, I really can’t see what your problem with the thread on is.
    To some extent, you have now clarified this but I still don’t understand your reaction to the appearance of this thread in the first place. You have referred to it and length in two blogs and given it considerable coverage. You finished off by telling us guys that you were thoroughly bored and pissed off with what we were up to.
    But what exactly were we up to?
    It’s a well-moderated and homely sort of board where newcomers are always welcomed but most of the members have been around for quite a while and all threads
    inevitably go off-topic and we revert to giving Johnno our considered advice. The thread in question was certainly no different.
    An individual poster started the thread off. He was critical of one point of your last match analysis and stated that you appeared to have a grudge against one particular player.
    “Willie Joe really has it in for Liam O’Malley doesn’t he? What’s the story there anyone know? Of the 6 positions available I would have O’Malley my third name on the teamsheet after Higgins and my clubmate. Howley looks like he might get there as well for an extended run. After that I couldn’t be too sure but I think Willie Joe is way off the mark.”
    He was then open to replies, obviously.
    Yes he was critical and gave his opinion; he thought you were way off the mark.
    The first reply disagreed with this and quoted Sean Rice to back up his own take on proceedings.
    I’m not going to go too far along this road but I’d add in, if I may, the contents of the third post:
    “willie joe runs a great blog:”
    Going by the timing of your blogs the only post that could have caused you to go taking the buckshot out of your hide in Malta was:

    “every one is free to express an opinion but when you publish it you better be able to defend it and not use it as a place to settle old grudges like willie joe seem to be doing to liam”
    The only other piece I feel you could have taken exception to is:

    “It is a sour note of an otherwise good blog, especially for those who can’t make every game.”

    That, Willie Joe, is the total criticism I can find on that thread!
    Furthermore, one should be free to fault anyone’s performance, Liam O’Malley’s included; if this is done on a public forum you can expect critical replies. But why do they have to be posted on your board?
    I honestly don’t see your point at all and I suppose I never will, but maybe we can agree to differ here.
    The reason given by the member starting that thread was that he felt you had a grudge against O’Malley and the majority of post in reply either disagreed with his opinion or couldn’t be bothered but just got on with the main business of discussing the Mayo team.
    But the thread starter did give a reason for flaming you. Most disagreed with himt he did not bring your personal affairs, family circumstances or anything of a personal or private nature into it. To me is an essential component of Netiquette.
    My reason for getting in touch with you initially was that I feel you yourself do not follow the same protocol and that is a pity. For instance, I am inclined to personally agree with your assessments of Colm Coyle and Fintan O’Toole. If I gave my reasons for stating such opinions on a public forum, I’d be inclined to give my grounds for doing so.
    Of course it would be impractical to do this all the time but Messrs. Coyle and O’Toole can hardly be expected, if they ever hear of your remarks, to come onto your board to discuss the matter with you?
    If you are that upset at what appeared on mayofans why don’t you join up and give your two cent worth there?
    Like I’ve said, Willie Joe, I hope to continue to read your blogs and to disagree with you at any time and I do appreciate the time you put in and the perspective you see things from. However, I still don’t fathom why you went so OTT over what was written on our board about you.
    It was late at night, after a tough day, and I was wrecked when I wrote the last piece. There was nothing personal or derogatory in my advice to go see a urologist. You had admitted to being “pissed off” with the lot of us and I was following an association of ideas at the time.
    From personal experience, I feel urologists are good people to sort out any problems in that area.
    I once invited one of them to piss off when he began to waffle on for too long and his reply was short and sweet:
    “Listen” sez he, “You are talking in the present tense about what I should do in the near future, but when you see my bill it will be very past tense all the way for you and your problems.”
    He was almost right!

    Keep the faith,

  4. Hi Lar

    Thanks for your lengthly response. As you say and as I’m happy to confirm, there’s no acrimony between us on this and I appreciate the fact that you’ve taken the time to discuss the issue. I’ll try to be brief in responding.

    The reason I raised the thread at all on the site here was to deal with the very specific allegation that what I had to say about Liam O’Malley was driven by some kind of grudge. I regarded this as a serious (as well as a ludicrous) allegation, one which I felt should not be left unchallenged. I thought I dealt with it in a fairly even-handed way and I can’t see that anything I wrote there could be construed as being OTT.

    The reason I mentioned it again, in Friday’s post, was specifically because another contributor on the thread repeated the allegation (this is the one you quoted above) despite the fact that I had already clarified the point in the post on Wednesday (as well as in responses to comments left on the site). In the single paragraph that I devoted to this point in Friday’s post, I made it clear that my annoyance was solely confined to the discussion about my motives for what I wrote. Again, I don’t feel that what I wrote was OTT and I didn’t deal with it at length – as I said it was only one paragraph in quite a long post.

    I have to admit I don’t understand at all your point about my not following certain protocols. As you’ve said that this is the reason you decided to post your initial comment, I feel I should but, despite rereading what you’ve said a number of times, I’m still none the wiser.

    I know that I could, of course, come on the discussion board and join the debate but it’s not an avenue that appeals to me. What I’m attempting here is, in my own small way, to establish some kind of GAA blogging tradition. When I first considered doing this, I was amazed that nobody else was blogging in this way and I still can’t understand why there aren’t more GAA bloggers out there. (Why can’t Kerry produce a few? They have a rich literary tradition and a few good footballers to write about, after all).

    I do put a fair amount of time into this (much of which is devoted to compiling a comprehensive results archive which, once completed, will be a resource to Mayo fans everywhere) hence my annoyance at and reaction to what I felt was a cheap shot at my motives for writing what I did.

    We’ve probably done this issue to death at this stage. Kerry in Castlebar next Sunday should help to concentrate all our minds on what really matters!

    All the best


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *