Laois v Armagh

[T Fearon]

No team would turn down a second chance.For sporting integrity rules must be obeyed.

[Cavan97]

if this game is termed a Replay and not a rematch, should it not be in the Athletic grounds?

[maccer]

Experience of challenges to previous GAA rulings should show you a good legal mind would probably walk all over this decision if laois wanted to go down that route. As a laois person I wouldn't like them fighting this in committee rooms. We've already won this once on the pitch (and no matter what people hide behind the truth is laois were by far the better team) and it would be preferable to do it's that way again

[AZOffaly]

Seems to be a contradiction in terms here alright. If it's a rematch, then the first game should be null and void. Hosted again in Portlaoise, but John O'Loughlin should not be allowed play. In essence the first game never happened. (and fans should be allowed in free).

If it is a 'replay', then it should be in Armagh, and John O'Loughlin should be free to play.

[westbound]

Laois should have called CCCC's bluff and not accepted replay proposal.
There were then 2 options
1.  a fine for Laois
2.  Laois thrown out - Clare would get a bye in Qualifier Round 2 - I don't think this is correct? I think the game would have been awarded to armagh rather than laois forfeiting the qualifier round 2 game

The absence of sportsmanship on the Armagh side should be plain for all to see.
There couldn't get through front door or back door so they sneak in through an open window.
It's not too late for them to redeem themselves and refuse replay.

Why should Armagh refuse a replay?

Laois broke a rule

The punishment for breaking such a rule is a fine, a replay or forfeiting the game.

The CCCC chose the replay punishment.

Why have rules at all if we don't enforce them?

If Armagh had a spare man for the last minute or so of the game who is to say that they wouldn't have scored a goal to win the game instead of conceding another point?

I think the replay is the correct option.

On a slightly separate point, HOW is this even allowed to happen by the fourth official? The fourth official has about 3 jobs, one of which should be to COUNT the subs on each team! It's not rocket science.

[rosnarun]

was the 4th official not introduced to take this respondsility from the teams.
if anyone should be sanctioned it shou be the  4th official

[Rossfan]

Between the Christy Ring Final Ref and this sideline (8th) official -
Time the GAA brought in numeracy tests for match officials.
As for umpires and eye tests - some right carry on n in Carrick last Sunday by all accounts.

[Ulick]

Laois should have called CCCC's bluff and not accepted replay proposal.
There were then 2 options
1.  a fine for Laois
2.  Laois thrown out - Clare would get a bye in Qualifier Round 2

The absence of sportsmanship on the Armagh side should be plain for all to see.
There couldn't get through front door or back door so they sneak in through an open window.
It's not too late for them to redeem themselves and refuse replay.

No, I think technically Laois would forfeit the game meaning the win awarded to Armagh who would get a bye through to play Clare. 

[five points]

Experience of challenges to previous GAA rulings should show you a good legal mind would probably walk all over this decision if laois wanted to go down that route. As a laois person I wouldn't like them fighting this in committee rooms. We've already won this once on the pitch (and no matter what people hide behind the truth is laois were by far the better team) and it would be preferable to do it's that way again

Read the rulebook. It's very clear. It's also the reason the CCCC couldn't ignore the Laois error, as otherwise Armagh would have had a slam dunk opportunity to object.

Of course Laois accepted it as they know full well that a hearing on foot of an Armagh objection could have decided (perfectly validly) to kick them out of the Championship.

[illdecide]

I think its fair to say that majority of true Armagh fans accepted we were beat by a better team last Saturday and that the decision is a bit harsh on Laois, Armagh were poor and the best team on the day won the match. I think it's also fair to say that Armagh did not make a complaint about this 7th sub issue it was the CCCC who picked up on it and the wheels were already in motion early Monday morning.

A whole pile of scenarios could have happened if this and that (we'll never know)but Armagh have got a 2nd chance to redeem themselves and to say for them to decline the opportunity is silly. If we go down and are beat again (which is likely given morale, on the beer and injuries) then fair play to Laois and we'll wish them luck against Clare.

I feel there may well be a bit more interest at this game and a larger crowd than last Saturday should be in attendance, some Laois fans may go to the game and hopefully a few more Armagh people make the journey and with a bit of luck a football match could break out and may the best team win...

P.S. if Armagh were to win we'll agree to play you again so it's best of 3 (that is a joke btw)

[Unlaoised]

More importantly, the result was the only one that let me down in my 5 team accumulator!! Will the CCC 'recommend' that paddy power gives me my stake back, or pays out on the 4 viable results and one non-runner?? 

interesting very interesting....

[JoG2]

both teams have benefited from this ruling ie Armagh are still in the championship and Laois didn't get kicked out

Can HQ clarify if the first match is actually null and void,  if the next game is a replay, a rematch or just the match ! Surely it has to be null and void, so individual championship appearances, individual scoring etc don't count ??

The suspended player should in no shape or form be able to play in this game (no harm to him)

[five points]

both teams have benefited from this ruling ie Armagh are still in the championship and Laois didn't get kicked out

Can HQ clarify if the first match is actually null and void,  if the next game is a replay, a rematch or just the match ! Surely it has to be null and void, so individual championship appearances, individual scoring etc don't count ??

The suspended player should in no shape or form be able to play in this game (no harm to him)

It's not null and void once the CCCC accepts the referee's report, which it has done.

The suspended player has served his suspension. End of.

[maccer]

Read the rulebook. It's very clear. It's also the reason the CCCC couldn't ignore the Laois error, as otherwise Armagh would have had a slam dunk opportunity to object.

Of course Laois accepted it as they know full well that a hearing on foot of an Armagh objection could have decided (perfectly validly) to kick them out of the Championship.
[/quote]

For a start I believe laois should accept this and move on to win the next game as we won the first. As regards not accepting....Just think of recent high profile  challenges to gaa rulings. Most would have said the rulebook was clear but plenty of holes were found. If the roles were reversed I would be disappointed if laois took Armagh's stance. If laois do win the next day it will only drive armagh football into deeper depression

[DuffleKing]

The only error really on the CCCC'S behalf is that the game should be in Armagh but they likely went with hat from a moral perspective knowing Armagh weren't going to argue.