Should An Glenn object?

[seafoid]

Without going through the GAAs prehistoric and ambiguous rule sets that count for little to be honest, the buck probably stops with the referee. It's still a game, irrelevant of the location or occasion. The line indicates a sub is being made and the referee should not restart play until he sees a player coming on and one going off. However, there is surely the added protection there in that every fella who comes on makes the replaced player aware of the switch. But without playing the blame game, it's irrelevant as to who was at fault, with the main point being the result of having an extra player which breaks the basic laws of the game.

What are the precedents by the way?  I'm sure, as it's been with any GAA controversy, that there has been inconsistent actions taken to deal with incidents of similar nature. This is what leads me to think that someone could chance their arm and leave a player on, or a player could keep himself on if possible. Most will know that it's more likely that it will be punished in any way other than a replay or forfeiting of the title, as the macho nature of the GAA more than likely will prevent a club appealing results over infringements as its always seen as sour grapes etc. and most old schoolers would be of the view that you should just suck it up and take it like a man.

The rule is about number of players rather than who did what. 16 v 15 is not acceptable.
As David Keown said above the only way to know what happened would be to investigate the statements of KC's various players and management.

[trailer]

What is the contingency if the GAA order a replay and KC tell them to go f**k themselves? (Which I think they will)

Some interesting views but if KC say they won't turn up and Glen do it will look wild for the GAA and Glen. Just imagine how it will look. Mostly likely is Glen refuse to replay it as well, claiming a moral victory and at least it doesn't look like a massive dose of sour grapes from Glen. If Glen really want to win it this way, (which I don't think they do) then KC should put the Cup on the bus and send it up to them.

[Dreadnought]

Without going through the GAAs prehistoric and ambiguous rule sets that count for little to be honest, the buck probably stops with the referee. It's still a game, irrelevant of the location or occasion. The line indicates a sub is being made and the referee should not restart play until he sees a player coming on and one going off. However, there is surely the added protection there in that every fella who comes on makes the replaced player aware of the switch. But without playing the blame game, it's irrelevant as to who was at fault, with the main point being the result of having an extra player which breaks the basic laws of the game.

What are the precedents by the way?  I'm sure, as it's been with any GAA controversy, that there has been inconsistent actions taken to deal with incidents of similar nature. This is what leads me to think that someone could chance their arm and leave a player on, or a player could keep himself on if possible. Most will know that it's more likely that it will be punished in any way other than a replay or forfeiting of the title, as the macho nature of the GAA more than likely will prevent a club appealing results over infringements as its always seen as sour grapes etc. and most old schoolers would be of the view that you should just suck it up and take it like a man.

I've been on the sideline of many pitches during games. It is on the club who bring a player on to see that a player comes off.

But there are precedents. Armagh Laois in a league game. A Christy ring game involving Meath and another I can't recall. That's intercounty, there are far more club games around the country over the years that saw replays. So it really is set out there.

[seafoid]

Doesn't HQ have to send the appeal to Kilmacud and give them 3 days for any response they wish to submit.

You'd have thought that if you're looking for KC to respond to something it would be from a ruling Croke have sent them?

It's like a legal thingy... you make your case, I'm asked to respond, then Judge considers and rules on the matter.

I suspect KC will get a fine for not taking their man off and the Ref mind find himself getting eased off the list.

Yes, and I heard Marty Morrissey saying Glen, (if they're unhappy with whatever's said by KC ) can have three more days to consider appealing. 

There is a reasonable chance that most of what KC say will be bullshit. They will probably blame the ref and take no responsibility .

[nrico2006]

Without going through the GAAs prehistoric and ambiguous rule sets that count for little to be honest, the buck probably stops with the referee. It's still a game, irrelevant of the location or occasion. The line indicates a sub is being made and the referee should not restart play until he sees a player coming on and one going off. However, there is surely the added protection there in that every fella who comes on makes the replaced player aware of the switch. But without playing the blame game, it's irrelevant as to who was at fault, with the main point being the result of having an extra player which breaks the basic laws of the game.

What are the precedents by the way?  I'm sure, as it's been with any GAA controversy, that there has been inconsistent actions taken to deal with incidents of similar nature. This is what leads me to think that someone could chance their arm and leave a player on, or a player could keep himself on if possible. Most will know that it's more likely that it will be punished in any way other than a replay or forfeiting of the title, as the macho nature of the GAA more than likely will prevent a club appealing results over infringements as its always seen as sour grapes etc. and most old schoolers would be of the view that you should just suck it up and take it like a man.

I've been on the sideline of many pitches during games. It is on the club who bring a player on to see that a player comes off.

But there are precedents. Armagh Laois in a league game. A Christy ring game involving Meath and another I can't recall. That's intercounty, there are far more club games around the country over the years that saw replays. So it really is set out there.

Yep, definitely are. But aren't there also precedents where its happened and nothing was really done about it.

[imtommygunn]

Meath Antrim christy ring. Meath got presented with the cup too. That was a case of the score was counted wrong. They still bloody won the next day 

[Armamike]

KC will probably come back and claim something along the lines of 'not our problem, talk to the ref'.  At that point would it get bounced back to Glen or would the GAA actually make a decision?  Whatever the committee decides,  it could get contested and tied up in legal knots.  Hopefully not!

[seafoid]

What is the contingency if the GAA order a replay and KC tell them to go f**k themselves? (Which I think they will)

Some interesting views but if KC say they won't turn up and Glen do it will look wild for the GAA and Glen. Just imagine how it will look. Mostly likely is Glen refuse to replay it as well, claiming a moral victory and at least it doesn't look like a massive dose of sour grapes from Glen. If Glen really want to win it this way, (which I don't think they do) then KC should put the Cup on the bus and send it up to them.

Why is this likely to happen ?

[Armagh18]

I wonder if either of these teams are back training yet. If either of them got back into training it would give them an edge for the potential replay.

I would say they are unless KC are planning on flat out refusing to play a replay or Glen are intending on not playing. Don't think either are too likely
Too much at stake to be still on the beer.

[lenny]

I wonder if either of these teams are back training yet. If either of them got back into training it would give them an edge for the potential replay.

I would say they are unless KC are planning on flat out refusing to play a replay or Glen are intending on not playing. Don't think either are too likely
Too much at stake to be still on the beer.

There is zero chance that either team will replay this game.

[Armagh18]

I wonder if either of these teams are back training yet. If either of them got back into training it would give them an edge for the potential replay.

I would say they are unless KC are planning on flat out refusing to play a replay or Glen are intending on not playing. Don't think either are too likely
Too much at stake to be still on the beer.

There is zero chance that either team will replay this game.

Why raise an objection then?

What if replay is called and KC refuse?

[Milltown Row2]

I wonder if either of these teams are back training yet. If either of them got back into training it would give them an edge for the potential replay.

I would say they are unless KC are planning on flat out refusing to play a replay or Glen are intending on not playing. Don't think either are too likely
Too much at stake to be still on the beer.

There is zero chance that either team will replay this game.

So all these posts were for nathin?!!! FFS I'll never get those hours back, at least I have a new title, stupid door

Who's stopping these two teams meeting next year? there will be some drive regardless of the outcome

[Jeepers Creepers]

Ref will carry the can. Kilmacud will be fined and Glen will politely decline a reply.

[WT4E]

Could it all end up in a we don't wany it u can have it from both teams.

[WT4E]

Ref will carry the can. Kilmacud will be fined and Glen will politely decline a reply.

They can't impose a fine if they go for a replay or am I misunderstanding