We need to talk about Diarmuid

[Hardy]

So regarding the wording of the rule then.

Does that not mean that even if the ref hadn't mentioned it in his report, could the CCCC still not have requested Clarification of the Referee's Report

Rule 7.3(e) says the CCCC can request clarification from a referee if it (the CCCC) "is in the course of investigating a possible infraction not stated in the referee's report".  The thing is, I can't find anywhere a specification of the circumstances in which the CCCC would be investigating something that's not in the referee's report – i.e. in what circumstances they are allowed to investigate stuff that the referee hasn't reported.

In fact, Rule 7.3(e) lays out the three circumstances in which disciplinary action alleging misconduct at games may  be initiated by the CCCC and it does not include a situation where the referee has submitted a report but not mentioned the misconduct.

It's another example of woolly drafting of rules that provides a living for lawyers.

The lawyer for the CCCC will say, "we needed to investigate something the referee didn't report, so we wrote to the referee under Rule 7.3(e) and asked whether he believes it's something to deal with or that he dealt with it or dealt correctly with it".

The lawyer for the defendant will say, "you had no business investigating something that wasn't in the referee's report – see Rule 7.3(f) for the only circumstances in which you may initiate an investigation. You'll find that does not allow you to make up stuff that's not in the referee's report".

May the best lawyer win.

Does this mean that if in a game, a ref gives a lad a yellow card but the CCCC think it should be red then they can or they cannot ask him to review it?

Not under any provision I can see in Rule 7.3.

[J70]

Way off topic here but you Mayo guys are unreal, look at this youtube clip. It has KK's red card in slow motion. It is absolutely crystal clear that KK struck MM with an open handed slap...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlPbGHVA8FU

Definitely clear in this video, however Murphy should also have received a red in this case.

Why?

He has a hold of Keane's jersey, he doesn't throw a punch or strike a player.

Yellow for Murphy, red for Keane would have been the correct call there. If some lad grabs your jersey or gives you a bit of a shove and you react like Keane did and take a swing then you're looking at a red card. Brainless stuff from Keane at the time.

Murphy did more than simply hold his jersey and should have received worse punishment than Keane.

No, he didn't. Murphy did not swing at Keane. He grabbed his jersey and shoved Keane. Keane responded by swinging at Murphy and hit him in the face. Keane was a red card offence, there was no red card offence in what Murphy did.

Murphy shoved Keane in the face with a closed fist, the fact that he was also holding his jersey shouldn't hide the fact that this is also a strike.

Come one FFS! You have to be taking the piss!

He grabbed Keane's jersey, Keane was struggling and grabbed Murphy's arm, presumably to free himself, causing the movement of Murphy's fist (which was closed due to his grip on the jersey) towards Keane's face.

Yellow card for both as Keane's "strike" was hardly worthy of the name.

I'd forgotten completely about this incident and was expecting a fairly straightforward box from the way you're going on!

[macdanger2]

So regarding the wording of the rule then.

Does that not mean that even if the ref hadn't mentioned it in his report, could the CCCC still not have requested Clarification of the Referee's Report

Rule 7.3(e) says the CCCC can request clarification from a referee if it (the CCCC) "is in the course of investigating a possible infraction not stated in the referee's report".  The thing is, I can't find anywhere a specification of the circumstances in which the CCCC would be investigating something that's not in the referee's report – i.e. in what circumstances they are allowed to investigate stuff that the referee hasn't reported.

In fact, Rule 7.3(e) lays out the three circumstances in which disciplinary action alleging misconduct at games may  be initiated by the CCCC and it does not include a situation where the referee has submitted a report but not mentioned the misconduct.

It's another example of woolly drafting of rules that provides a living for lawyers.

The lawyer for the CCCC will say, "we needed to investigate something the referee didn't report, so we wrote to the referee under Rule 7.3(e) and asked whether he believes it's something to deal with or that he dealt with it or dealt correctly with it".

The lawyer for the defendant will say, "you had no business investigating something that wasn't in the referee's report – see Rule 7.3(f) for the only circumstances in which you may initiate an investigation. You'll find that does not allow you to make up stuff that's not in the referee's report".

May the best lawyer win.

Does this mean that if in a game, a ref gives a lad a yellow card but the CCCC think it should be red then they can or they cannot ask him to review it?

Not under any provision I can see in Rule 7.3.

Have a look at the disciplinary handbook part III. It's in there that basically the CCCC can look at anything they like EXCEPT with reference to rule 3.7 where the ref has adjudicated on it -  they can seek clarification from the ref on whether he adjudicated on something or not.

[Lar Naparka]

Way off topic here but you Mayo guys are unreal, look at this youtube clip. It has KK's red card in slow motion. It is absolutely crystal clear that KK struck MM with an open handed slap...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlPbGHVA8FU

Definitely clear in this video, however Murphy should also have received a red in this case.

Why?

He has a hold of Keane's jersey, he doesn't throw a punch or strike a player.

Yellow for Murphy, red for Keane would have been the correct call there. If some lad grabs your jersey or gives you a bit of a shove and you react like Keane did and take a swing then you're looking at a red card. Brainless stuff from Keane at the time.

Murphy did more than simply hold his jersey and should have received worse punishment than Keane.

No, he didn't. Murphy did not swing at Keane. He grabbed his jersey and shoved Keane. Keane responded by swinging at Murphy and hit him in the face. Keane was a red card offence, there was no red card offence in what Murphy did.

Murphy shoved Keane in the face with a closed fist, the fact that he was also holding his jersey shouldn't hide the fact that this is also a strike.

Come one FFS! You have to be taking the piss!

He grabbed Keane's jersey, Keane was struggling and grabbed Murphy's arm, presumably to free himself, causing the movement of Murphy's fist (which was closed due to his grip on the jersey) towards Keane's face.

Yellow card for both as Keane's "strike" was hardly worthy of the name.

I'd forgotten completely about this incident and was expecting a fairly straightforward box from the way you're going on!

Whatever about Keane's actions, I cannot see why Murphy shouldn't have gotten a straight red. By any stretch of logic you like, grabbing someone by the front of his jersey and pushing him backwards would constitute an assault. Try it out some day at a bus stop or similar and you'll see what I mean.
You may be indubitably correct here, "Keane was struggling and grabbed Murphy's arm, presumably to free himself, causing the movement of Murphy's fist (which was closed due to his grip on the jersey) towards Keane's face."
But whether it was his face or his arse that Murphy grabbed, Keane was assaulted.
Now, just as you can't half dig a hole or give someone half a kick up the arse, you can't grab a fistful of an opponent's jersey and attempt to push him backwards without committing an assault. Whatever Keane did or didn't do to cause Murphy to act in such a manner isn't an issue here. That's a separate matter.

[Il Bomber Destro]

Way off topic here but you Mayo guys are unreal, look at this youtube clip. It has KK's red card in slow motion. It is absolutely crystal clear that KK struck MM with an open handed slap...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlPbGHVA8FU

Definitely clear in this video, however Murphy should also have received a red in this case.

Why?

He has a hold of Keane's jersey, he doesn't throw a punch or strike a player.

Yellow for Murphy, red for Keane would have been the correct call there. If some lad grabs your jersey or gives you a bit of a shove and you react like Keane did and take a swing then you're looking at a red card. Brainless stuff from Keane at the time.

Murphy did more than simply hold his jersey and should have received worse punishment than Keane.

No, he didn't. Murphy did not swing at Keane. He grabbed his jersey and shoved Keane. Keane responded by swinging at Murphy and hit him in the face. Keane was a red card offence, there was no red card offence in what Murphy did.

Murphy shoved Keane in the face with a closed fist, the fact that he was also holding his jersey shouldn't hide the fact that this is also a strike.

Come one FFS! You have to be taking the piss!

He grabbed Keane's jersey, Keane was struggling and grabbed Murphy's arm, presumably to free himself, causing the movement of Murphy's fist (which was closed due to his grip on the jersey) towards Keane's face.

Yellow card for both as Keane's "strike" was hardly worthy of the name.

I'd forgotten completely about this incident and was expecting a fairly straightforward box from the way you're going on!

Whatever about Keane's actions, I cannot see why Murphy shouldn't have gotten a straight red. By any stretch of logic you like, grabbing someone by the front of his jersey and pushing him backwards would constitute an assault. Try it out some day at a bus stop or similar and you'll see what I mean.
You may be indubitably correct here, "Keane was struggling and grabbed Murphy's arm, presumably to free himself, causing the movement of Murphy's fist (which was closed due to his grip on the jersey) towards Keane's face."
But whether it was his face or his arse that Murphy grabbed, Keane was assaulted.

Assaulted?

The level of partiality with you Mayo lads is off the scale. It's a simple case of a bit of pushing and shoving with Keane completely overreacting, striking his opponent which carries a red card as per the rules. He received it and it should never have been overheld.

There is no rule regarding assault. There is a rule regarding striking or attempting to strike an opponent. It's very obvious Keane struck Murphy, it's very obvious Murphy was holding onto Keane's jersey and therefore couldn't strike him.

I will once again state that there is no red card offence for assault. Is grappling with someone on the floor assault? By that stretch I'm sure you're looking for Lee Keegan to be sent off nearly every match he plays.

[Farrandeelin]

Anyway, it's a good job Keane wasn't used in either of the subsequent games that year.

[criostlinn]

Way off topic here but you Mayo guys are unreal, look at this youtube clip. It has KK's red card in slow motion. It is absolutely crystal clear that KK struck MM with an open handed slap...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlPbGHVA8FU

Definitely clear in this video, however Murphy should also have received a red in this case.

Why?

He has a hold of Keane's jersey, he doesn't throw a punch or strike a player.

Yellow for Murphy, red for Keane would have been the correct call there. If some lad grabs your jersey or gives you a bit of a shove and you react like Keane did and take a swing then you're looking at a red card. Brainless stuff from Keane at the time.

Murphy did more than simply hold his jersey and should have received worse punishment than Keane.

No, he didn't. Murphy did not swing at Keane. He grabbed his jersey and shoved Keane. Keane responded by swinging at Murphy and hit him in the face. Keane was a red card offence, there was no red card offence in what Murphy did.

Murphy shoved Keane in the face with a closed fist, the fact that he was also holding his jersey shouldn't hide the fact that this is also a strike.

Come one FFS! You have to be taking the piss!

He grabbed Keane's jersey, Keane was struggling and grabbed Murphy's arm, presumably to free himself, causing the movement of Murphy's fist (which was closed due to his grip on the jersey) towards Keane's face.

Yellow card for both as Keane's "strike" was hardly worthy of the name.

I'd forgotten completely about this incident and was expecting a fairly straightforward box from the way you're going on!

Whatever about Keane's actions, I cannot see why Murphy shouldn't have gotten a straight red. By any stretch of logic you like, grabbing someone by the front of his jersey and pushing him backwards would constitute an assault. Try it out some day at a bus stop or similar and you'll see what I mean.
You may be indubitably correct here, "Keane was struggling and grabbed Murphy's arm, presumably to free himself, causing the movement of Murphy's fist (which was closed due to his grip on the jersey) towards Keane's face."
But whether it was his face or his arse that Murphy grabbed, Keane was assaulted.

Assaulted?

The level of partiality with you Mayo lads is off the scale. It's a simple case of a bit of pushing and shoving with Keane completely overreacting, striking his opponent which carries a red card as per the rules. He received it and it should never have been overheld.

There is no rule regarding assault. There is a rule regarding striking or attempting to strike an opponent. It's very obvious Keane struck Murphy, it's very obvious Murphy was holding onto Keane's jersey and therefore couldn't strike him.

I will once again state that there is no red card offence for assault. Is grappling with someone on the floor assault? By that stretch I'm sure you're looking for Lee Keegan to be sent off nearly every match he plays.

You really are obsessed with Mayo. Its unhealthy. You will argue black is white or white is black just to have the final say on a Mayo issue.
As you say "There is a rule regarding striking or attempting to strike an opponent". It doesn't say how far you have to swing back. It can be a haymaker or a jab.  If the offender is holding a jersey so be it.  But as I said earlier, Keane got off this because he argued Murphy had him by the throat and he slapped him across the face in order to free his grip. This was accepted by the cccc or whoever sits on these things. You can argue it should have been a red, a ban whatever you want but the fact of the matter is the people who looked at this independently, and not some obsessed nut job from Tymoan decided Keane should not have got a red and thus should not have been banned.

J70 has already said it. This was a nothing incident and both players should probably have been yellow carded. This seems to be the line the cccc took on it.

[mayoaremagic]

Way off topic here but you Mayo guys are unreal, look at this youtube clip. It has KK's red card in slow motion. It is absolutely crystal clear that KK struck MM with an open handed slap...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlPbGHVA8FU

Definitely clear in this video, however Murphy should also have received a red in this case.

Why?

He has a hold of Keane's jersey, he doesn't throw a punch or strike a player.

Yellow for Murphy, red for Keane would have been the correct call there. If some lad grabs your jersey or gives you a bit of a shove and you react like Keane did and take a swing then you're looking at a red card. Brainless stuff from Keane at the time.

Murphy did more than simply hold his jersey and should have received worse punishment than Keane.

No, he didn't. Murphy did not swing at Keane. He grabbed his jersey and shoved Keane. Keane responded by swinging at Murphy and hit him in the face. Keane was a red card offence, there was no red card offence in what Murphy did.

Murphy shoved Keane in the face with a closed fist, the fact that he was also holding his jersey shouldn't hide the fact that this is also a strike.

Come one FFS! You have to be taking the piss!

He grabbed Keane's jersey, Keane was struggling and grabbed Murphy's arm, presumably to free himself, causing the movement of Murphy's fist (which was closed due to his grip on the jersey) towards Keane's face.

Yellow card for both as Keane's "strike" was hardly worthy of the name.

I'd forgotten completely about this incident and was expecting a fairly straightforward box from the way you're going on!

Whatever about Keane's actions, I cannot see why Murphy shouldn't have gotten a straight red. By any stretch of logic you like, grabbing someone by the front of his jersey and pushing him backwards would constitute an assault. Try it out some day at a bus stop or similar and you'll see what I mean.
You may be indubitably correct here, "Keane was struggling and grabbed Murphy's arm, presumably to free himself, causing the movement of Murphy's fist (which was closed due to his grip on the jersey) towards Keane's face."
But whether it was his face or his arse that Murphy grabbed, Keane was assaulted.

Assaulted?

The level of partiality with you Mayo lads is off the scale. It's a simple case of a bit of pushing and shoving with Keane completely overreacting, striking his opponent which carries a red card as per the rules. He received it and it should never have been overheld.

There is no rule regarding assault. There is a rule regarding striking or attempting to strike an opponent. It's very obvious Keane struck Murphy, it's very obvious Murphy was holding onto Keane's jersey and therefore couldn't strike him.

I will once again state that there is no red card offence for assault. Is grappling with someone on the floor assault? By that stretch I'm sure you're looking for Lee Keegan to be sent off nearly every match he plays.

Keegan play on the edge but he wouldn't choke players like what Murphy done there.

[ballinaman]

Anyway, it's a good job Keane wasn't used in either of the subsequent games that year.

I think Kevin would take a 6 month retrospective ban no problem today.

[nrico2006]

Way off topic here but you Mayo guys are unreal, look at this youtube clip. It has KK's red card in slow motion. It is absolutely crystal clear that KK struck MM with an open handed slap...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlPbGHVA8FU

Definitely clear in this video, however Murphy should also have received a red in this case.

Why?

He has a hold of Keane's jersey, he doesn't throw a punch or strike a player.

Yellow for Murphy, red for Keane would have been the correct call there. If some lad grabs your jersey or gives you a bit of a shove and you react like Keane did and take a swing then you're looking at a red card. Brainless stuff from Keane at the time.

Murphy did more than simply hold his jersey and should have received worse punishment than Keane.

No, he didn't. Murphy did not swing at Keane. He grabbed his jersey and shoved Keane. Keane responded by swinging at Murphy and hit him in the face. Keane was a red card offence, there was no red card offence in what Murphy did.

Murphy shoved Keane in the face with a closed fist, the fact that he was also holding his jersey shouldn't hide the fact that this is also a strike.

Come one FFS! You have to be taking the piss!

He grabbed Keane's jersey, Keane was struggling and grabbed Murphy's arm, presumably to free himself, causing the movement of Murphy's fist (which was closed due to his grip on the jersey) towards Keane's face.

Yellow card for both as Keane's "strike" was hardly worthy of the name.

I'd forgotten completely about this incident and was expecting a fairly straightforward box from the way you're going on!

Whatever about Keane's actions, I cannot see why Murphy shouldn't have gotten a straight red. By any stretch of logic you like, grabbing someone by the front of his jersey and pushing him backwards would constitute an assault. Try it out some day at a bus stop or similar and you'll see what I mean.
You may be indubitably correct here, "Keane was struggling and grabbed Murphy's arm, presumably to free himself, causing the movement of Murphy's fist (which was closed due to his grip on the jersey) towards Keane's face."
But whether it was his face or his arse that Murphy grabbed, Keane was assaulted.

Assaulted?

The level of partiality with you Mayo lads is off the scale. It's a simple case of a bit of pushing and shoving with Keane completely overreacting, striking his opponent which carries a red card as per the rules. He received it and it should never have been overheld.

There is no rule regarding assault. There is a rule regarding striking or attempting to strike an opponent. It's very obvious Keane struck Murphy, it's very obvious Murphy was holding onto Keane's jersey and therefore couldn't strike him.

I will once again state that there is no red card offence for assault. Is grappling with someone on the floor assault? By that stretch I'm sure you're looking for Lee Keegan to be sent off nearly every match he plays.

You really are obsessed with Mayo. Its unhealthy. You will argue black is white or white is black just to have the final say on a Mayo issue.
As you say "There is a rule regarding striking or attempting to strike an opponent". It doesn't say how far you have to swing back. It can be a haymaker or a jab.  If the offender is holding a jersey so be it.  But as I said earlier, Keane got off this because he argued Murphy had him by the throat and he slapped him across the face in order to free his grip. This was accepted by the cccc or whoever sits on these things. You can argue it should have been a red, a ban whatever you want but the fact of the matter is the people who looked at this independently, and not some obsessed nut job from Tymoan decided Keane should not have got a red and thus should not have been banned.

J70 has already said it. This was a nothing incident and both players should probably have been yellow carded. This seems to be the line the cccc took on it.

Well said, I class what Murphy did as a strike.  Never heard the term 'Jumper Punch' before, but I think that this shows that you can hold a jersey and strike at the same time, something that Il Bomber thought was impossible to do.  As mentioned too, a strike doesn't necessarily have to be a world class punch. 

[Fuzzman]

I'm surprised no new rule has been brought in to stop this holding people by the neck or this not letting go of the jersey and trying to rip it off. It really has become rife in the game now as nobody wants to throw a punch any more.

[Lar Naparka]

I'm surprised no new rule has been brought in to stop this holding people by the neck or this not letting go of the jersey and trying to rip it off. It really has become rife in the game now as nobody wants to throw a punch any more.

+1
Couldn't agree more.

[Il Bomber Destro]

Way off topic here but you Mayo guys are unreal, look at this youtube clip. It has KK's red card in slow motion. It is absolutely crystal clear that KK struck MM with an open handed slap...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlPbGHVA8FU

Definitely clear in this video, however Murphy should also have received a red in this case.

Why?

He has a hold of Keane's jersey, he doesn't throw a punch or strike a player.

Yellow for Murphy, red for Keane would have been the correct call there. If some lad grabs your jersey or gives you a bit of a shove and you react like Keane did and take a swing then you're looking at a red card. Brainless stuff from Keane at the time.

Murphy did more than simply hold his jersey and should have received worse punishment than Keane.

No, he didn't. Murphy did not swing at Keane. He grabbed his jersey and shoved Keane. Keane responded by swinging at Murphy and hit him in the face. Keane was a red card offence, there was no red card offence in what Murphy did.

Murphy shoved Keane in the face with a closed fist, the fact that he was also holding his jersey shouldn't hide the fact that this is also a strike.

Come one FFS! You have to be taking the piss!

He grabbed Keane's jersey, Keane was struggling and grabbed Murphy's arm, presumably to free himself, causing the movement of Murphy's fist (which was closed due to his grip on the jersey) towards Keane's face.

Yellow card for both as Keane's "strike" was hardly worthy of the name.

I'd forgotten completely about this incident and was expecting a fairly straightforward box from the way you're going on!

Whatever about Keane's actions, I cannot see why Murphy shouldn't have gotten a straight red. By any stretch of logic you like, grabbing someone by the front of his jersey and pushing him backwards would constitute an assault. Try it out some day at a bus stop or similar and you'll see what I mean.
You may be indubitably correct here, "Keane was struggling and grabbed Murphy's arm, presumably to free himself, causing the movement of Murphy's fist (which was closed due to his grip on the jersey) towards Keane's face."
But whether it was his face or his arse that Murphy grabbed, Keane was assaulted.

Assaulted?

The level of partiality with you Mayo lads is off the scale. It's a simple case of a bit of pushing and shoving with Keane completely overreacting, striking his opponent which carries a red card as per the rules. He received it and it should never have been overheld.

There is no rule regarding assault. There is a rule regarding striking or attempting to strike an opponent. It's very obvious Keane struck Murphy, it's very obvious Murphy was holding onto Keane's jersey and therefore couldn't strike him.

I will once again state that there is no red card offence for assault. Is grappling with someone on the floor assault? By that stretch I'm sure you're looking for Lee Keegan to be sent off nearly every match he plays.

You really are obsessed with Mayo. Its unhealthy. You will argue black is white or white is black just to have the final say on a Mayo issue.
As you say "There is a rule regarding striking or attempting to strike an opponent". It doesn't say how far you have to swing back. It can be a haymaker or a jab.  If the offender is holding a jersey so be it.  But as I said earlier, Keane got off this because he argued Murphy had him by the throat and he slapped him across the face in order to free his grip. This was accepted by the cccc or whoever sits on these things. You can argue it should have been a red, a ban whatever you want but the fact of the matter is the people who looked at this independently, and not some obsessed nut job from Tymoan decided Keane should not have got a red and thus should not have been banned.

J70 has already said it. This was a nothing incident and both players should probably have been yellow carded. This seems to be the line the cccc took on it.

Well said, I class what Murphy did as a strike.  Never heard the term 'Jumper Punch' before, but I think that this shows that you can hold a jersey and strike at the same time, something that Il Bomber thought was impossible to do.  As mentioned too, a strike doesn't necessarily have to be a world class punch.

Just like Diarmuid Connolly's is a nothing incident.

Either the rules are upheld or they are not. Kevin Keane clearly swung a punch at Michael Murphy, he caught him in the face (doesn't impact either way on the punishment) and was correctly red carded. You can say it was a nothing incident but by the rules in place it's a red card.

I think Connolly's is a nothing incident, it's a slight shove but they have implemented a ban in line with the rules. I'm making the point that Mayo people like to have their cake and eat it. Michael Murphy did not commit a red card offence, Kevin Keane did. Lee Keegan's red card against Kerry should also have stood in accordance with the rules however harsh it was, as should Connolly's red card against Donegal.

[Il Bomber Destro]

Way off topic here but you Mayo guys are unreal, look at this youtube clip. It has KK's red card in slow motion. It is absolutely crystal clear that KK struck MM with an open handed slap...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlPbGHVA8FU

Definitely clear in this video, however Murphy should also have received a red in this case.

Why?

He has a hold of Keane's jersey, he doesn't throw a punch or strike a player.

Yellow for Murphy, red for Keane would have been the correct call there. If some lad grabs your jersey or gives you a bit of a shove and you react like Keane did and take a swing then you're looking at a red card. Brainless stuff from Keane at the time.

Murphy did more than simply hold his jersey and should have received worse punishment than Keane.

No, he didn't. Murphy did not swing at Keane. He grabbed his jersey and shoved Keane. Keane responded by swinging at Murphy and hit him in the face. Keane was a red card offence, there was no red card offence in what Murphy did.

Murphy shoved Keane in the face with a closed fist, the fact that he was also holding his jersey shouldn't hide the fact that this is also a strike.

Come one FFS! You have to be taking the piss!

He grabbed Keane's jersey, Keane was struggling and grabbed Murphy's arm, presumably to free himself, causing the movement of Murphy's fist (which was closed due to his grip on the jersey) towards Keane's face.

Yellow card for both as Keane's "strike" was hardly worthy of the name.

I'd forgotten completely about this incident and was expecting a fairly straightforward box from the way you're going on!

Whatever about Keane's actions, I cannot see why Murphy shouldn't have gotten a straight red. By any stretch of logic you like, grabbing someone by the front of his jersey and pushing him backwards would constitute an assault. Try it out some day at a bus stop or similar and you'll see what I mean.
You may be indubitably correct here, "Keane was struggling and grabbed Murphy's arm, presumably to free himself, causing the movement of Murphy's fist (which was closed due to his grip on the jersey) towards Keane's face."
But whether it was his face or his arse that Murphy grabbed, Keane was assaulted.

Assaulted?

The level of partiality with you Mayo lads is off the scale. It's a simple case of a bit of pushing and shoving with Keane completely overreacting, striking his opponent which carries a red card as per the rules. He received it and it should never have been overheld.

There is no rule regarding assault. There is a rule regarding striking or attempting to strike an opponent. It's very obvious Keane struck Murphy, it's very obvious Murphy was holding onto Keane's jersey and therefore couldn't strike him.

I will once again state that there is no red card offence for assault. Is grappling with someone on the floor assault? By that stretch I'm sure you're looking for Lee Keegan to be sent off nearly every match he plays.

You really are obsessed with Mayo. Its unhealthy. You will argue black is white or white is black just to have the final say on a Mayo issue.
As you say "There is a rule regarding striking or attempting to strike an opponent". It doesn't say how far you have to swing back. It can be a haymaker or a jab.  If the offender is holding a jersey so be it.  But as I said earlier, Keane got off this because he argued Murphy had him by the throat and he slapped him across the face in order to free his grip. This was accepted by the cccc or whoever sits on these things. You can argue it should have been a red, a ban whatever you want but the fact of the matter is the people who looked at this independently, and not some obsessed nut job from Tymoan decided Keane should not have got a red and thus should not have been banned.

J70 has already said it. This was a nothing incident and both players should probably have been yellow carded. This seems to be the line the cccc took on it.

Well said, I class what Murphy did as a strike.  Never heard the term 'Jumper Punch' before, but I think that this shows that you can hold a jersey and strike at the same time, something that Il Bomber thought was impossible to do.  As mentioned too, a strike doesn't necessarily have to be a world class punch.

You're imagining a shove is a punch when it clearly isn't. Murphy's arm is clearly extended and holding onto Keane's jersey which he doesn't let go of. There is no red card offence for holding onto someone's jersey and shoving them with that hand. There is no red card offence that discriminates between which part of the body contact is made with regarding when it comes to being struck. What Murphy did in that case happens every single game in Championship and there is no sending off rule against it. It's what's referred to as handbags.

What Keane did is a cut and dry red card. As harmless as it was he threw a punch and struck Murphy, not that it matters whether Murphy was caught or not as all it needs is an attempt to strike. Keane had no defence whatsoever.

There was a lot of criticism about Keane getting his ban overturned at the time and quite rightly. There was nobody claiming Murphy should have been red carded as there is no red card sanction for holding on to a jersey or shoving them

[Farrandeelin]

Way off topic here but you Mayo guys are unreal, look at this youtube clip. It has KK's red card in slow motion. It is absolutely crystal clear that KK struck MM with an open handed slap...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlPbGHVA8FU

Definitely clear in this video, however Murphy should also have received a red in this case.

Why?

He has a hold of Keane's jersey, he doesn't throw a punch or strike a player.

Yellow for Murphy, red for Keane would have been the correct call there. If some lad grabs your jersey or gives you a bit of a shove and you react like Keane did and take a swing then you're looking at a red card. Brainless stuff from Keane at the time.

Murphy did more than simply hold his jersey and should have received worse punishment than Keane.

No, he didn't. Murphy did not swing at Keane. He grabbed his jersey and shoved Keane. Keane responded by swinging at Murphy and hit him in the face. Keane was a red card offence, there was no red card offence in what Murphy did.

Murphy shoved Keane in the face with a closed fist, the fact that he was also holding his jersey shouldn't hide the fact that this is also a strike.

Come one FFS! You have to be taking the piss!

He grabbed Keane's jersey, Keane was struggling and grabbed Murphy's arm, presumably to free himself, causing the movement of Murphy's fist (which was closed due to his grip on the jersey) towards Keane's face.

Yellow card for both as Keane's "strike" was hardly worthy of the name.

I'd forgotten completely about this incident and was expecting a fairly straightforward box from the way you're going on!

Whatever about Keane's actions, I cannot see why Murphy shouldn't have gotten a straight red. By any stretch of logic you like, grabbing someone by the front of his jersey and pushing him backwards would constitute an assault. Try it out some day at a bus stop or similar and you'll see what I mean.
You may be indubitably correct here, "Keane was struggling and grabbed Murphy's arm, presumably to free himself, causing the movement of Murphy's fist (which was closed due to his grip on the jersey) towards Keane's face."
But whether it was his face or his arse that Murphy grabbed, Keane was assaulted.

Assaulted?

The level of partiality with you Mayo lads is off the scale. It's a simple case of a bit of pushing and shoving with Keane completely overreacting, striking his opponent which carries a red card as per the rules. He received it and it should never have been overheld.

There is no rule regarding assault. There is a rule regarding striking or attempting to strike an opponent. It's very obvious Keane struck Murphy, it's very obvious Murphy was holding onto Keane's jersey and therefore couldn't strike him.

I will once again state that there is no red card offence for assault. Is grappling with someone on the floor assault? By that stretch I'm sure you're looking for Lee Keegan to be sent off nearly every match he plays.

You really are obsessed with Mayo. Its unhealthy. You will argue black is white or white is black just to have the final say on a Mayo issue.
As you say "There is a rule regarding striking or attempting to strike an opponent". It doesn't say how far you have to swing back. It can be a haymaker or a jab.  If the offender is holding a jersey so be it.  But as I said earlier, Keane got off this because he argued Murphy had him by the throat and he slapped him across the face in order to free his grip. This was accepted by the cccc or whoever sits on these things. You can argue it should have been a red, a ban whatever you want but the fact of the matter is the people who looked at this independently, and not some obsessed nut job from Tymoan decided Keane should not have got a red and thus should not have been banned.

J70 has already said it. This was a nothing incident and both players should probably have been yellow carded. This seems to be the line the cccc took on it.

Well said, I class what Murphy did as a strike.  Never heard the term 'Jumper Punch' before, but I think that this shows that you can hold a jersey and strike at the same time, something that Il Bomber thought was impossible to do.  As mentioned too, a strike doesn't necessarily have to be a world class punch.

You're imagining a shove is a punch when it clearly isn't. Murphy's arm is clearly extended and holding onto Keane's jersey which he doesn't let go of. There is no red card offence for holding onto someone's jersey and shoving them with that hand. There is no red card offence that discriminates between which part of the body contact is made with regarding when it comes to being struck. What Murphy did in that case happens every single game in Championship and there is no sending off rule against it. It's what's referred to as handbags.

What Keane did is a cut and dry red card. As harmless as it was he threw a punch and struck Murphy, not that it matters whether Murphy was caught or not as all it needs is an attempt to strike. Keane had no defence whatsoever.

There was a lot of criticism about Keane getting his ban overturned at the time and quite rightly. There was nobody claiming Murphy should have been red carded as there is no red card sanction for holding on to a jersey or shoving them

I think you've made your point clear enough. As I said it was a good job he didn't get gametime against Dublin in the drawn game or replay.