CVByrne

This is the biggest load of rubbish I've ever read. Public sector are paid FAR more than the private sector. FACT. No disputing that at all. I can dig up reams of articles to state as much. Just google it. Public Sector pensions are miles better than private, by approx 20% it has been said. FACT. Public sector are the ones who've benefited MOST from the boom and benchmarking. People like to point to Laywers, Doctors, Bankers, Accountants etc.. who get more than the public sector workers. We'll there's a little thing people left out there, those people are the cream of the academic crop, they of course are going to get paid more than someone who goes into the public sector and more than 99% of the private sector who run businesses, who built homes, who work in shops. All these people are being hammered, taking pay cuts, losing their jobs at DELL, and the **** public sector who have always had it better won't take a smll pay cut. People are SEETHING with anger. I know people who have lost their jobs. Go tell them you won't take a 3.8% pension levy. Just because they don't have the powerful Unions to lay demands directly at the governments feet mean they are taking the hit. Noone else. WAKE THE **** UP.

Nonsense, my point was (through the anger) that teachers and nurses are the pople who are never attacked because they are the jobs which generate the sympathy from the public. Nobody was on RTE news sayng how much that civil servant in the department of agriculture will have to pay. Bottom line is it's not nice having you pay cut. But it sure as hell is alot nicer than losing you job and pension like the people from Waterford Wedgewood. People in the public sector are sheltered and I know plenty of teachers who live comfortable and they're in their 20's. So there is always some people who are going to take a hit they can't afford and that is unfortunate but inevitable. We need to stop worrying about 4% of our pay and look at the people who have lost everything and get a bit of perspective. All these poor teachers and nurses (my brother is a nruse) life comfortable, they've cars and homes and tv's and all still go drinking every weekend. People can afford these cut backs we just don't want them, myself included, but I would not argue with any tax increases or reasonable pay cuts because I have got some perspective of how **** we are if we don't get the public finances in order, our AAA rating will be gone and borrowing will cost more hence worsening our financial situation and will result in more pay cuts.

Teachers won't lose their jobs, they'll pay a levy on their pensions, they'll still be there to teach our children. Thousands of people are losing their jobs every week. Our Budget deficit will take 5 years to fix. We are not in a recession, we're in a black hole and people who are sheltered in the public sector need to wake the **** up. As for the 10% it can be a mix of increased tax and pay cuts, pay cuts can save business from going bust and hence keep people in employment meaning people paying tax and not taking benefit. Also pay cut in public sector reduced expenditure. We're already heading for deflation so that part is inevitable. My main anger is that we don't have the courage to face reality and work together like we did before and save this country. We're more concerned with blame and taking care of our own pockets. When asked to take a pay cut and Irish person will list his or her 10 reasons why others should take cuts before you.

Our Government has to fix our budget and needs the public sector to take their share of the cuts. With a levy on their defined benefit pensions. 1.4bln is all, and the Social Partnership couldn't accept it. Industrial action looks liley and Moodys will downgrade our AAA status and hence our cost of borrowing will go up hence requiring more cuts and the spiral of doom. The usual crap is wheeled out saying the poor teachers, poor nurses blah blah. **** the teachers, they earn a **** fortune for doing half a years work. Straight out of College a teacher starts on 37,000. Thats 33,000 sterling, plus amazing pension and job for life. They're asked to take a 3.8% levy on their pensions like all public servants and they wont. Nobody wants to take a pay cut, but people need to think of the people who are losing their jobs every **** day in the Private Sector, who's pension funds are gone bust. Tell them you won't take a 3.8% levy. **** disgrace. This country will never get out of this if the small first step like this leads to industrial action. Anyone earning over 40,000 a year should take a 10% pay cut. EVERONE. That would be brave and could save our country. We won't because we're greedy and selfish.

No Ian. We were worthless poor depressed people in the 80's slaves to a despicable Catholic Curch. We make some very hard decisions and decided to work together to make Ireland a better place. We cut corporate tax to invite foreign investment, we created the social partnership so there would be no industrial action. We make 3rd Level education free to build an educated state. All of this created the Celtic Tiger and was a credit to this country. But then we got greedy, we wanted money, more money and still want it. The more money we got the more inflation increased and the more pay increaes the Unions wanted. We paid huge public sector pay increases far beyond all European countries. How did we afford it? Of course we funded it with non sustainable stamp duties on property. We had a holy trinity of greed the Government, Property Developers and Banks. All equally to blame in all of this, but the people most to blame our ourselves, we were far more greedy than even them. What do you expect banks to do? Make money What do you expect Property Developers to do? Make themselves money What do you expect the Government to do? Buy Votes and get re-elected. But we were happy to play this game and we went property mad. You can't place the blame with them when nobody forced you to take out a 100% mortgage and buy a rediculously over priced house. Then people wanted another house becuase their neighbour had one and property prices only go one way. Greed Greed Greed. Now we want to blame someone, it has fallen to the banks to take the blame. Despite the fact the entire world banking system is in tatters, only the banks in your country are the evil ones, they did all the harm to you. Now we're back in the 80's, our country is a mess we can make the hard decisions and get us out of this. But we can't because we're not the brave people we once were, we're greedy **** cowards who deserve every single thing we get. We just want to blame someone other than accept we're all to blame in this mess. All the respect I have for my country is gone, the last of it died today. The brave thing would be cross party decisions on how to fix our country and we should accept their decisions, regardless of how much they take from our pay. We're all over paid as it is.

You're having a laugh. All our politician are criminals, but we re-elect them, we don't care they're lining their pockets while in Government. We don't seem to care they pay themselves more than any government in all of Europe. Our Prime Minister is paid more than Barak Obama FFS. And He sure as hell has never smiled the fat toad wasn't even elected. Bertie just took his pile of money and **** off leaving us in this mess. Unions are now going to fight for every penny and our country will grind to a halt, implode and become Iceland 2. Simply put we all are over paid. We should all take pay cuts of at least 10% to bring competitiveness back. But we won't because we're all greedy, selfish cowards.

You have it easy across the water. Try living in this black hole called Ireland. Country is going down the toilet, we've bred a country of greedy selfish stubborn fools, we're finished if you ask me. We have no leadership in either Government or opposition and we're doomed. The End. So you English quit moaning.

Sorry forgot Jonhson, he's better.

Can't think of a better English right-back bar Brown who was very good for United last year but is currently injured.

Obviously not that dangerous, because we score less and gain less points when he plays? Pointless statistic. Its about winning games not just scoring goals. If you know anything about football you'd know hiow much of an asset a big talented player like Carew can give a team. Especially at Villa Park, maybe we are better 4-5-1 away from home but I know we missed carew in the Fulham game.

Look with Carew in our team it's dangerous for teams to sit deep to defend against our pace because Carew can win balls launched into the box. Simply put he's an asset to our team.

I believe if he played for us now in his Prime he'd be banging the goals in. Bottom line is we were rubbish, utter rubbish team when he was here and he's a confidence player. The one season we had a good run he scored 23 goals. Says it all. I love JPA. Always will.

Thats why we should bring in technology, the benefits far out weight the negatives. Which are very minimal if the ref is still the only one who stops the game.

I don't believe that. If you use it only for Penalty decisions, you don't have to use it for every other decision. Thats like saying goal line technology would be implemented for balls going out of play. I'm sure people would be happy to draw the line at using Video evidence only to confirm match changing decisions like penalties. Red cards could just be for straight reds. Or all video evidence could be at the request of the Ref only. So if the ref wants to confirm his decision he asks the video ref. Also if the decision is made wrong by video evidence or if you could make an argument for either side that's a consequence of football. But it'll certainly improve the amound of big decisions called correctly. The other option is taking a bit from Levs idea. Captains have two chances per game to challenge the refs decision and only then is a video ref to call it. This would save Refs from giving appaling decisions against teams. Captains who know the ref has got it wrong can let the video ref decide. The limit of two challenges means captains will not waste the refs time with small incidents in case he's run out of challenges to save a big decision late in the game. As for an argument that it'll slow down the game, people faking injury slows down games alot more. Big arguments over bad decisions will slow a game more also.

Gotta be Arsenal, loved the way they played football. It's a bit different now that we're direct rivals to them. So I went for United, would love them to knock Liverpool off their **** perch. I despise Liverpool Football Club. Detest them to my utter core. I'd say I hate them 100 times more than SHA

No debts, some savings, I rent so no big mortgage and currently have job security. But as we've seen things can change rather quickly. But currently I'm not worried about losing my job. My friends and family are in good shape too, no jobs losses yet but this will be another bad year.

What about 2 extra officials behind the goals. Who are only there to help on penalty decisions or balls crossing the line? They can't flag for offences just help a ref make the correct decision if asked.

Well I have another argument against As soon as this technology becomes available to referees, they wont use it how you think they'll use it. As time goes on, they will use the technology more and more and their own eyes less and less.Nearly every decision will become a video decision. It wont be long before refs start to stop the game because they think there may have been something but they didnt quite see it, right now, if they aren't sure play carries on but with this it'll be stop, stop stop all the time. Refs will soon stop the game just to see if there was an infringement, One moan from a captain and it'll be straight to the video (again more time wasting). Then presumably, they will have to add on time at the end of each half for all the video stoppages and even the rednosedtosser will be amazed at how much time is added on at the end of a game Its the nature of the beast I agree, but the refs are marked by external assesers so they would be marked down for stopping the game so much so it wouldn't become as bad as you say. Also Video evidence can only be used for Penalty decisions and red card incidents so how many of them do you have in a game? I just want those big decisions to be correct. The rest of the game remains untouched. I really can't see the downside. Since the upside is big decisions are called correctly.

you not answered my point CV football is about human error, most goals are due to errors so do we make the players error free of course not players lose far more games than refs ever do Errors on the part of players. We don't want ref errors. So the biggest ref errors like penalties and red card can be aided by video and no cost to the fluidity of the game. As this simple poll has shown most people would rather the refs get these big decisions right at no cost to the game and the method I outlined does just that. You don't want technology because you like when the ref gets the big decisions wrong from time to time and thats fine. I on the other hand would rather them get it right and cheats like Gerrard and Ronaldo don't get away with it.

Football has changed, Sky changed it. This addition of video evidence for these decisions is required IF we want to improve the decision making in the game. The ONLY reason to stay the way it is is if we want to keep these errors. But arguements that technology would fail or ruin the flow of the game is nonsense. The argument is simply between getting more decisions right or consciously deciding to keep the errors.

The only argument against this would be people who like refs getting penalty decisions wrong from time to time.

How have we stopped the game arteficially Ian? The ref has blown for a penalty and the video ref either confirms his decision or corrects him. This stops most bad penalty decisions and there is no downside as the games has already been stopped by the ref as would happen currently. As for decisions againstr us I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about football in general. Too many poor penalty decisions have cost teams in huge matches these poor decisions could be eliminated without any slowing down of the game.

If it's inconclusive then the decision can't be given, whatever it was. Penalty, goal, throw in, corner, whatever. If it's inconclusive then it isn't given, that's how it is in other sports. Yes, if the official can't see a penalty then he will say no penalty. Any discrepancies will be tight calls and will happen but it's better than losing a match to a cheat like Gerrard diving when a quick check to the video ref says, booking and no penalty.

How is it worse? The ref has blown for a penalty and asks the video ref if there's any reason why I can't give this. If the video ref can't find a reason for the ref not to give it, then it's given. It was going to be given anyway. The video ref just removes most of the incorrect decisions. As for my reasons I'd like teams to win matches on the merit of their teams ability, not on erronious ref decisions. Wayne Rooney dived to win a penalty that cost Arsenal 50 games unbeaten in a row, a quick check with a video ref would have changed this huge decision and the course of that season could possibly have been different. United cheated to win a match and I poersonally believe thats wrong.