I am actually not insinuating that some_thing witty. I can’t remember how I phrased it, something like players being missing for ‘variety of reasons’ I think. I was arguing our skills shortage is not as lacking as it seemed last weekend, if you take out some of our best guys, the skill level will drop. That is was the main point I was making.
Disaffected players is a separate (older) argument. I personally think we would have been a better team with Sutcliffe and Carton involved. I also think, and this can’t be backed up as it is opinion (but neither can the converse), that Keaney had at least another year in him and may have stayed if he had liked the set up better. I think Nolan has the longest puck out of the three keepers involved and it may bave been interesting to see the ball hit extra long. Kelly is injured, but there are also issues (which I suggested months ago on the old forum). If the manager wants to make all those changes, good luck to him. But implicit in all that is that it brings improvement. I don’t think it has.
But that second point is multi-layered, and nuanced and all sort of things. So, with respect, I am not really getting into a debate about it, because a) it is opinion and there are counter opinions and that is great - but long term it can’t actually go anywhere, just an exchange of opinions and that has been done. b) While I don’t think Cunningham is doing a good job, especially on man management issues, the logical conclusion to that debate is that his head is called for - and I am not sure if that is the answer (I would prefer a change in methodology), but also internet forums aren’t the place for calling for the head of amateur GAA people. (And in the absence of any other knowledge, he is amateur)