Outside interference in Gaelic Games

[Lone Shark]

Before I start this topic, let me just be clear - I wasn't in Portlaoise yesterday so I have no idea what happened there and nothing which follows is meant to infer guilt or innocence upon any individuals, teams or clubs.


Having read through a variety of reports on yesterday's game in O'Moore Park, what is fair to say is that for whatever reason, the sanctity of the pitch area as a place for players and officials alone clearly was not preserved. Outsiders coming onto the pitch during the game is a poorly regulated area in GAA at the best of times, and there have been several instances in the past where non-players have attempted to become involved in games where clearly there is no place for them.

Among the allegations that have been made, and I stress allegations, are:

(1) A water carrier interfering with a player attempting to take a sideline ball and starting a fight
(2) A player being set upon by a group of substitutes and/or supporters from the other team
(3) A player having to leave the field and miss half the game due to being struck by a mentor for the opposite team.

Now I have no idea if any of these allegations are true or not, and I have no wish to get into a debate about this particular instance. That's not the point of this post.

However, if these were proved to be true, either by way of video evidence or the referee's report, then it is clear that the result of the game has been materially affected by the actions of those who have no part in the match. Fining the club is no consolation to the team that has lost out, and anyway, fines by their definition affect different clubs differently. A €1000 fine is of little consequence to a successful senior club with plenty of benefactors, while it is a severe punishment on a small junior club with an annual budget of €30,000. Equally a six month suspension on a supporter is of little or no consequence, and is hardly ever enforced.

So the question I would ask is - is there a case to me made for a team to be thrown out and the losers re-instated in such a case? Obviously the burden of proof would have to be high, both in terms of what happened and who were the perpetrators, but it seems wrong that a team can lose a match, in part due to an injury to a key player which was sustained, not in the natural run of play, but due to a cheap shot from a sub/waterboy/supporter.

[highorlow]

Where are the guards when it comes to these games? Shurley these are criminal acts? Is it not akin to a streaker coming onto a pitch during a game?

[Lone Shark]

Obviously in an ideal world there would be guards there, but with so many retirees, no overtime and so many of the last recruitment batch all on maternity leave, it's not realistic to expect large scale policing of every game.

Also, the civil and criminal aspects should be kept separate. I'm not saying criminal sanction shouldn't apply where warranted - I'm a firm believer that it should. However as GAA members, all we can do is worry about the sporting side of things, and what we can do to keep things fair.

In fairness, a streaker might be a distraction, but it doesn't change a result in the same way that physically assaulting a player may do.

[cornafean]

So the question I would ask is - is there a case to me made for a team to be thrown out and the losers re-instated in such a case? Obviously the burden of proof would have to be high, both in terms of what happened and who were the perpetrators, but it seems wrong that a team can lose a match, in part due to an injury to a key player which was sustained, not in the natural run of play, but due to a cheap shot from a sub/waterboy/supporter.

So what you're saying is if an opposing player gets shot by a gun fired from the Hill in next year's All Ireland final, the Dubs should automatically lose the game?

Good luck with that one

[cornafean]

Obviously in an ideal world there would be guards there,

Why? Aren't we better off with GAA stewards?

[Denn Forever]

(1) A water carrier interfering with a player attempting to take a sideline ball and starting a fight
(2) A player being set upon by a group of substitutes and/or supporters from the other team
(3) A player having to leave the field and miss half the game due to being struck by a mentor for the opposite team.

Are these people not already allowed on the field?  Ideally the linesman should be able to deal with this e.g. cite those that perpetrate such acts.

[Lone Shark]

So the question I would ask is - is there a case to me made for a team to be thrown out and the losers re-instated in such a case? Obviously the burden of proof would have to be high, both in terms of what happened and who were the perpetrators, but it seems wrong that a team can lose a match, in part due to an injury to a key player which was sustained, not in the natural run of play, but due to a cheap shot from a sub/waterboy/supporter.

So what you're saying is if an opposing player gets shot by a gun fired from the Hill in next year's All Ireland final, the Dubs should automatically lose the game?

Argument by way of bizarre extremes. Okay.

I'm not saying I have all the answers, but I am saying that there should be a response to make sure no advantage is gained by the side committing the assault. Perhaps the answer is abandonment of the game for replay at a later date, which in fairness, I think we're pretty sure is what would happen in the case you have cited above. Perhaps it would have been better if the same thing happened yesterday - again I don't know, I wasn't there.

Secondly, and just to be clear here, I am stressing that this should only be in cases where either the referee's report or the video evidence, if it exists, clearly identifies the culprit(s).

However if we were to take a case where outside interference was proven on the part of Team B in a victory over Team A. If the outcome was a replay of the game, at a suitable venue of Team A's choosing, with all appropriate suspensions imposed. Would anyone here feel that this would be an unfair outcome? 

[Lone Shark]

Obviously in an ideal world there would be guards there,

Why? Aren't we better off with GAA stewards?

Sometimes. However those intent on getting involved in a game where they have no place to do so would possibly respect a uniform faster than they would respect a local steward, who in many cases would be neutral, but in some, may not.

(1) A water carrier interfering with a player attempting to take a sideline ball and starting a fight
(2) A player being set upon by a group of substitutes and/or supporters from the other team
(3) A player having to leave the field and miss half the game due to being struck by a mentor for the opposite team.

Are these people not already allowed on the field?  Ideally the linesman should be able to deal with this e.g. cite those that perpetrate such acts.

(1) Water carriers are allowed on the field during breaks in play. They are not allowed to interfere with play. Substitutes/Supporters/Mentors are not and equally, are not allowed interfere with the game. I'm not talking about enforcing a rule like this when these people step onto the grass anyway - only when they physically interfere with the opposition and cause injury.
(2) Even if the linesman is able to do this, what use is that to the team that has lost as a result? One team loses a crucial match, with no comeback, the winning side is sanctioned by way of having their waterboy suspended? That's hardly justice.

[Hardy]

Obviously in an ideal world there would be guards there,

Why? Aren't we better off with GAA stewards?

Really? Are we?

[Jinxy]

Stewards work quite well for normal GAA supporters but special arrangements may be necessary when Tyrone teams are playing.
Give the maors riot shields and pepper spray I say.

[squire_in_navy_slacks]

Where are the guards when it comes to these games? Shurley these are criminal acts? Is it not akin to a streaker coming onto a pitch during a game?

Couple of garda play the game already and are some of the mouthiest gombeens on the park...............................above the law comes to mind

[crossfire]

Before I start this topic, let me just be clear - I wasn't in Portlaoise yesterday so I have no idea what happened there and nothing which follows is meant to infer guilt or innocence upon any individuals, teams or clubs.


Having read through a variety of reports on yesterday's game in O'Moore Park, what is fair to say is that for whatever reason, the sanctity of the pitch area as a place for players and officials alone clearly was not preserved. Outsiders coming onto the pitch during the game is a poorly regulated area in GAA at the best of times, and there have been several instances in the past where non-players have attempted to become involved in games where clearly there is no place for them.

Among the allegations that have been made, and I stress allegations, are:

(1) A water carrier interfering with a player attempting to take a sideline ball and starting a fight
(2) A player being set upon by a group of substitutes and/or supporters from the other team
(3) A player having to leave the field and miss half the game due to being struck by a mentor for the opposite team.

Now I have no idea if any of these allegations are true or not, and I have no wish to get into a debate about this particular instance. That's not the point of this post.

However, if these were proved to be true, either by way of video evidence or the referee's report, then it is clear that the result of the game has been materially affected by the actions of those who have no part in the match. Fining the club is no consolation to the team that has lost out, and anyway, fines by their definition affect different clubs differently. A €1000 fine is of little consequence to a successful senior club with plenty of benefactors, while it is a severe punishment on a small junior club with an annual budget of €30,000. Equally a six month suspension on a supporter is of little or no consequence, and is hardly ever enforced.

So the question I would ask is - is there a case to me made for a team to be thrown out and the losers re-instated in such a case? Obviously the burden of proof would have to be high, both in terms of what happened and who were the perpetrators, but it seems wrong that a team can lose a match, in part due to an injury to a key player which was sustained, not in the natural run of play, but due to a cheap shot from a sub/waterboy/supporter.

What if the losers started the fight. Have a look at the video on the other thread.   

[Lone Shark]

What if the losers started the fight. Have a look at the video on the other thread.   

I did. I don't see this "start the fight" stuff on that clip at all. Here's what I posted on the other thread:

On that clip the Derrytresk guy with the clipboard (who is out of the technical area and in a zone he's not supposed to be) is the one advancing towards the players. Both men appear to be swinging at the same time but certainly the first thing I see is a Derrytresk player on the ground, no idea how he got there (though other posters say it was from a fair shoulder) and the Derrytresk official going to where he has no right to be - from a place that he has no right to be.

We have Dromid number 4 and the clipboard guy swinging away, and guys with bibs in the area but nobody else initially doing anything violent.  Then the Derrytresk number 18 is the next one on the scene getting involved, followed immediately by the Dromid number 5, followed by a lot of guys in bibs, who admittedly could be from anywhere since there are four different colour bibs, albeit two of the guys are wearing blue underneath, and then a lot of Derrytresk subs.

Again, I wasn't there, so I'm not saying anyone started it. I'm saying that there are a lot of posters on this board saying Dromid started it, and the clip definitely does not show that.


In the general case, if "the losers" as you put it start the fight, unprovoked, with a non-playing member of the opposition, then of course this rule wouldn't apply. However if a mentor/water carrier tries to stop play proceeding by holding up a sideline ball for example, then yes I would say that they, and not the guy throwing the punch, have started it and would have no difficulty enforcing this rule if that in turn leads to this kind of free for all.

Let's be clear here, I'm talking about legislating for yesterday's situation, where the Dromid midfielder was forced to quite the game due to an attack from a member of the Derrytresk sideline, as was clearly shown on TV3 news. Dromid lost a key player, and that affects the game, so that should lead to a replayed situation in my view.

[tyssam5]

What if the losers started the fight. Have a look at the video on the other thread.   

I did. I don't see this "start the fight" stuff on that clip at all. Here's what I posted on the other thread:

On that clip the Derrytresk guy with the clipboard (who is out of the technical area and in a zone he's not supposed to be) is the one advancing towards the players. Both men appear to be swinging at the same time but certainly the first thing I see is a Derrytresk player on the ground, no idea how he got there (though other posters say it was from a fair shoulder) and the Derrytresk official going to where he has no right to be - from a place that he has no right to be.

We have Dromid number 4 and the clipboard guy swinging away, and guys with bibs in the area but nobody else initially doing anything violent.  Then the Derrytresk number 18 is the next one on the scene getting involved, followed immediately by the Dromid number 5, followed by a lot of guys in bibs, who admittedly could be from anywhere since there are four different colour bibs, albeit two of the guys are wearing blue underneath, and then a lot of Derrytresk subs.

Again, I wasn't there, so I'm not saying anyone started it. I'm saying that there are a lot of posters on this board saying Dromid started it, and the clip definitely does not show that.


In the general case, if "the losers" as you put it start the fight, unprovoked, with a non-playing member of the opposition, then of course this rule wouldn't apply. However if a mentor/water carrier tries to stop play proceeding by holding up a sideline ball for example, then yes I would say that they, and not the guy throwing the punch, have started it and would have no difficulty enforcing this rule if that in turn leads to this kind of free for all.

Let's be clear here, I'm talking about legislating for yesterday's situation, where the Dromid midfielder was forced to quite the game due to an attack from a member of the Derrytresk sideline, as was clearly shown on TV3 news. Dromid lost a key player, and that affects the game, so that should lead to a replayed situation in my view.

You got money to pay out on this one?

[haranguerer]

Stewards work quite well for normal GAA supporters but special arrangements may be necessary when Tyrone teams are playing.
Give the maors riot shields and pepper spray I say.

Lol!! A meath man!!! Pot, kettle!