We need to talk about Diarmuid

Started by Mayo4Sam, June 05, 2017, 09:37:38 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Syferus

Quote from: dublin7 on June 09, 2017, 09:58:17 PM
This thread was originally about Connolly bit like most threads has descended into farce. What is clear is almost all senior county players appeal a red card they receive. The only high profile player I can remember accepting his ban is John Mullane.

All counties/county boards are guilty of using ridiculous technicalities to get their player off. The fact that in most cases the red card was deserved is irrelevant. Serious hypocrisy and rubbish posted about Connolly by a lot of posters

Speak for your own county.

orangeman

Quote from: dublin7 on June 09, 2017, 09:58:17 PM
This thread was originally about Connolly bit like most threads has descended into farce. What is clear is almost all senior county players appeal a red card they receive. The only high profile player I can remember accepting his ban is John Mullane.

All counties/county boards are guilty of using ridiculous technicalities to get their player off. The fact that in most cases the red card was deserved is irrelevant. Serious hypocrisy and rubbish posted about Connolly by a lot of posters

You can add Diarmuid Connolly to the list of players who accept their punishment. No appeal is being lodged.


Fuzzman

Dublin7 do you think he deserved the ban?

dublin7

Quote from: Fuzzman on June 10, 2017, 12:22:07 AM
Dublin7 do you think he deserved the ban?

I think he is unlucky. The ref & linesman should have dealt with it at the time and sent him off. (That's what paddy Russell did to Evan comerford but spillane failed to mention)

I think the linesman was going to let it go but once sky kept repeating it he was gone. I'd also question how it was included in ref's report. Cynical me thinks a bit of editing may have been done.

One the ban came down he was right not to appeal.

dublin7

Quote from: Syferus on June 09, 2017, 10:43:30 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on June 09, 2017, 09:58:17 PM
This thread was originally about Connolly bit like most threads has descended into farce. What is clear is almost all senior county players appeal a red card they receive. The only high profile player I can remember accepting his ban is John Mullane.

All counties/county boards are guilty of using ridiculous technicalities to get their player off. The fact that in most cases the red card was deserved is irrelevant. Serious hypocrisy and rubbish posted about Connolly by a lot of posters

Speak for your own county.

Oh please get out of your world class team bus and come back to reality. A quick Google search will give you a list of news stories with players from various counties appealing red cards.

AZOffaly

Quote from: dublin7 on June 10, 2017, 07:00:22 AM
Quote from: Fuzzman on June 10, 2017, 12:22:07 AM
Dublin7 do you think he deserved the ban?

I think he is unlucky. The ref & linesman should have dealt with it at the time and sent him off. (That's what paddy Russell did to Evan comerford but spillane failed to mention)

I think the linesman was going to let it go but once sky kept repeating it he was gone. I'd also question how it was included in ref's report. Cynical me thinks a bit of editing may have been done.

One the ban came down he was right not to appeal.

IT should be noted that if the ref did send him off, he still would have gotten 12 weeks.

ballinaman

Quote from: AZOffaly on June 10, 2017, 08:14:43 AM
Quote from: dublin7 on June 10, 2017, 07:00:22 AM
Quote from: Fuzzman on June 10, 2017, 12:22:07 AM
Dublin7 do you think he deserved the ban?

I think he is unlucky. The ref & linesman should have dealt with it at the time and sent him off. (That's what paddy Russell did to Evan comerford but spillane failed to mention)

I think the linesman was going to let it go but once sky kept repeating it he was gone. I'd also question how it was included in ref's report. Cynical me thinks a bit of editing may have been done.

One the ban came down he was right not to appeal.

IT should be noted that if the ref did send him off, he still would have gotten 12 weeks.
Key point

Itchy

Connolly clearly did something that is as clear as day called out in the rule book and carried a 12 week ban. He got it and has accepted it. Hard to believe there is a debate about this for 19 pages.

dublin7

Quote from: AZOffaly on June 10, 2017, 08:14:43 AM
Quote from: dublin7 on June 10, 2017, 07:00:22 AM
Quote from: Fuzzman on June 10, 2017, 12:22:07 AM
Dublin7 do you think he deserved the ban?

I think he is unlucky. The ref & linesman should have dealt with it at the time and sent him off. (That's what paddy Russell did to Evan comerford but spillane failed to mention)

I think the linesman was going to let it go but once sky kept repeating it he was gone. I'd also question how it was included in ref's report. Cynical me thinks a bit of editing may have been done.

One the ban came down he was right not to appeal.

IT should be noted that if the ref did send him off, he still would have gotten 12 weeks.
Agreed. If the ref had sent him off immediately there would be no issue. It's the fact the linesman didn't say anything to the ref but it was included in his report that creates the issue and they should also be reprimanded

Main Street

Fair dues to Connolly for accepting the 12 week ban.

Jinxy

Good to see.
The fact that we're pleasantly surprised when players accept their punishment says it all though.
If you were any use you'd be playing.

dclane

He will have plenty of time to go to McGowan's now.

Lar Naparka

Quote from: dublin7 on June 10, 2017, 10:53:08 AM
Quote from: AZOffaly on June 10, 2017, 08:14:43 AM
Quote from: dublin7 on June 10, 2017, 07:00:22 AM
Quote from: Fuzzman on June 10, 2017, 12:22:07 AM
Dublin7 do you think he deserved the ban?

I think he is unlucky. The ref & linesman should have dealt with it at the time and sent him off. (That's what paddy Russell did to Evan comerford but spillane failed to mention)

I think the linesman was going to let it go but once sky kept repeating it he was gone. I'd also question how it was included in ref's report. Cynical me thinks a bit of editing may have been done.

One the ban came down he was right not to appeal.

IT should be noted that if the ref did send him off, he still would have gotten 12 weeks.
Agreed. If the ref had sent him off immediately there would be no issue. It's the fact the linesman didn't say anything to the ref but it was included in his report that creates the issue and they should also be reprimanded
Correct. That's a very valid point.
Nil Carborundum Illegitemi

Mayo Border

RTE Saturday sports on radio now. Lots of games on today & tomorrow. However Des the Thick only wants to talk about the "main story". Did the ref see it- but he didn't do anything. Ban shouldn't have happened as it wasn't in the ref's report- possibly added retrospectively. "Do you think it will affect Dublin's preparation, Joe? " Dublin Dublin Dublin

INDIANA

Quote from: dclane on June 10, 2017, 11:46:45 AM
He will have plenty of time to go to McGowan's now.

He might even manage to get you a bird there as well.