Hurling 2024

[johnnycool]

"It's not just the removal of the helmet though, it's if you've to stop the play to allow a physio on at all."

If I have to stop play.

Though if a physio comes on and can administer a spray while play continues I'm happy with that, should I have to blow the whistle and the player requires assistance they have to go off, now seeing as it was my first real go at it, I waved the player on rather than waiting for a break, he was genuinely hurt from a tackle from the other team, its a bit unfair surely to disadvantage them twice? 

But is that not wrong, going by them new rules?

Completely

Bitta common sense needs to be applied and while I'm not against following it to the letter, sometimes it's actually counterproductive and not serving the reason why it's introduced

The reason for the new rules is to prevent cynical playacting,  faking injuries to slow the game down like nicky quaid getting something in his eye last year.
If its genuine then it's harsh but if they're acting the bollox then I'd make them wait for the next break in play.

[Delgany 2nds]

"It's not just the removal of the helmet though, it's if you've to stop the play to allow a physio on at all."

If I have to stop play.

Though if a physio comes on and can administer a spray while play continues I'm happy with that, should I have to blow the whistle and the player requires assistance they have to go off, now seeing as it was my first real go at it, I waved the player on rather than waiting for a break, he was genuinely hurt from a tackle from the other team, its a bit unfair surely to disadvantage them twice? 

But is that not wrong, going by them new rules?

Completely

Bitta common sense needs to be applied and while I'm not against following it to the letter, sometimes it's actually counterproductive and not serving the reason why it's introduced

The reason for the new rules is to prevent cynical playacting,  faking injuries to slow the game down like nicky quaid getting something in his eye last year.
If its genuine then it's harsh but if they're acting the bollox then I'd make them wait for the next break in play.

This rule was apparently amended during the week, to include the goalkeeper! Doesn't make much sense.

[marty34]

"It's not just the removal of the helmet though, it's if you've to stop the play to allow a physio on at all."

If I have to stop play.

Though if a physio comes on and can administer a spray while play continues I'm happy with that, should I have to blow the whistle and the player requires assistance they have to go off, now seeing as it was my first real go at it, I waved the player on rather than waiting for a break, he was genuinely hurt from a tackle from the other team, its a bit unfair surely to disadvantage them twice? 

But is that not wrong, going by them new rules?

Completely

Bitta common sense needs to be applied and while I'm not against following it to the letter, sometimes it's actually counterproductive and not serving the reason why it's introduced

The reason for the new rules is to prevent cynical playacting,  faking injuries to slow the game down like nicky quaid getting something in his eye last year.
If its genuine then it's harsh but if they're acting the bollox then I'd make them wait for the next break in play.

This rule was apparently amended during the week, to include the goalkeeper! Doesn't make much sense.

I said that a few weeks ago that to circumvent all this is for the keeper to go down. The rule didn't mention keepers.

I'd make it another player must stand i  goals and team down to 14 players until next break in play.

[johnnycool]

"It's not just the removal of the helmet though, it's if you've to stop the play to allow a physio on at all."

If I have to stop play.

Though if a physio comes on and can administer a spray while play continues I'm happy with that, should I have to blow the whistle and the player requires assistance they have to go off, now seeing as it was my first real go at it, I waved the player on rather than waiting for a break, he was genuinely hurt from a tackle from the other team, its a bit unfair surely to disadvantage them twice? 

But is that not wrong, going by them new rules?

Completely

Bitta common sense needs to be applied and while I'm not against following it to the letter, sometimes it's actually counterproductive and not serving the reason why it's introduced

The reason for the new rules is to prevent cynical playacting,  faking injuries to slow the game down like nicky quaid getting something in his eye last year.
If its genuine then it's harsh but if they're acting the bollox then I'd make them wait for the next break in play.

This rule was apparently amended during the week, to include the goalkeeper! Doesn't make much sense.

I said that a few weeks ago that to circumvent all this is for the keeper to go down. The rule didn't mention keepers.

I'd make it another player must stand i  goals and team down to 14 players until next break in play.

That is what is meant to happen even if there's a penalty to be taken, if the keeper receives treatment from the incident that led to the penalty being given they too need to leave the field of play until the next break in play or in MR2's case when he waves him back on...

 

Those frankies never were ones for following the rules.

[Milltown Row2]

The biggest problem I see with this is some players in the heat of the game will wave away any medical attention so that they can stay on the pitch, which in turn will lead to missed concussions or other injuries

The common sense approach would be for the team that has a player waiting to come on would be to knock the ball outta play as soon as possible so their player can come straight back on

Be some gurning soon especially come championship