Should An Glenn object?

[WT4E]

Can't see how kilmacud can object

[Olly]

Is it  true that Glen wouldn't help Slaughtneil out when they needed a pitch when they were going flat out on all fronts?

[armaghniac]

They shouldn't replay the game but just retake the free. Get everyone together and if Watty's can get a  goal in one play from a free then they keep the cup. Kilmacud only allowed 15 men this time.

[Walter Cronc]

Is it  true that Glen wouldn't help Slaughtneil out when they needed a pitch when they were going flat out on all fronts?

Lay off the kool-aid Olly you clampit!

[seafoid]

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/gaelic-games/2023/01/28/we-should-be-screaming-about-survey-on-problem-gambling-among-intercounty-gaa-players/

I went for lunch on Wednesday with a dear friend who, to put it mildly, wouldn't be big into sport. She has nothing against it, it's just a world that lies behind a door she has never felt the urge to open. A typical text message: "Going to be over your way today around 3.30, might drop by?" That was the day of the 2021 All-Ireland final.

Anyway, we met for a bowl of soup on Wednesday and her first question, even before we'd hung our coats on the backs of the chairs, was, "Well, is there going to be a replay?"

[Hound]

Can't see how kilmacud can object

Their argument is they did nothing wrong.

They advised the officials they wanted to make the substitution.
The officials allowed the sub to come on.
The officials allowed the game to re-start without allowing time for Mullin to go off (or for anyone to tell Mullin that he was going off). 
The officials were notified of their error and did not order a retake.

Just a refereeing mistake. One of those things.  Unfortunate for Glen, but the rule everyone quotes is for when a club puts an extra player on without the permission of the officials. You can't penalise Crokes for the officials making a mistake.

That's how they can, and are, objecting.

During the 6 seconds of play where Crokes had 16 on the pitch, the Glen full back had a great chance to deflect the ball into the net, but missed. Imagine an alternative scenario where it was 15 v 15, and the full back got the crucial touch, the ball ended up in the net, the officials missed that he was in the square before the ball was played to him and wrongly allowed the goal. Would there be grounds for a replay because the winning goal was illegal? Of course not. A ref's error. Unfortunate for Crokes, but one of those things.

[lenny]

Can't see how kilmacud can object

Their argument is they did nothing wrong.

They advised the officials they wanted to make the substitution.
The officials allowed the sub to come on.
The officials allowed the game to re-start without allowing time for Mullin to go off (or for anyone to tell Mullin that he was going off). 
The officials were notified of their error and did not order a retake.

Just a refereeing mistake. One of those things.  Unfortunate for Glen, but the rule everyone quotes is for when a club puts an extra player on without the permission of the officials. You can't penalise Crokes for the officials making a mistake.

That's how they can, and are, objecting.

During the 6 seconds of play where Crokes had 16 on the pitch, the Glen full back had a great chance to deflect the ball into the net, but missed. Imagine an alternative scenario where it was 15 v 15, and the full back got the crucial touch, the ball ended up in the net, the officials missed that he was in the square before the ball was played to him and wrongly allowed the goal. Would there be grounds for a replay because the winning goal was illegal? Of course not. A ref's error. Unfortunate for Crokes, but one of those things.

That's how I see it also.

[Milltown Row2]

Can't see how kilmacud can object

Their argument is they did nothing wrong.

They advised the officials they wanted to make the substitution.
The officials allowed the sub to come on.
The officials allowed the game to re-start without allowing time for Mullin to go off (or for anyone to tell Mullin that he was going off). 
The officials were notified of their error and did not order a retake.

Just a refereeing mistake. One of those things.  Unfortunate for Glen, but the rule everyone quotes is for when a club puts an extra player on without the permission of the officials. You can't penalise Crokes for the officials making a mistake.

That's how they can, and are, objecting.

During the 6 seconds of play where Crokes had 16 on the pitch, the Glen full back had a great chance to deflect the ball into the net, but missed. Imagine an alternative scenario where it was 15 v 15, and the full back got the crucial touch, the ball ended up in the net, the officials missed that he was in the square before the ball was played to him and wrongly allowed the goal. Would there be grounds for a replay because the winning goal was illegal? Of course not. A ref's error. Unfortunate for Crokes, but one of those things.

Careful, you'll be called a stupid door for using logic like that!!

[Gael80]

Can't see how kilmacud can object

Their argument is they did nothing wrong.

They advised the officials they wanted to make the substitution.
The officials allowed the sub to come on.
The officials allowed the game to re-start without allowing time for Mullin to go off (or for anyone to tell Mullin that he was going off). 
The officials were notified of their error and did not order a retake.

Just a refereeing mistake. One of those things.  Unfortunate for Glen, but the rule everyone quotes is for when a club puts an extra player on without the permission of the officials. You can't penalise Crokes for the officials making a mistake.

That's how they can, and are, objecting.

During the 6 seconds of play where Crokes had 16 on the pitch, the Glen full back had a great chance to deflect the ball into the net, but missed. Imagine an alternative scenario where it was 15 v 15, and the full back got the crucial touch, the ball ended up in the net, the officials missed that he was in the square before the ball was played to him and wrongly allowed the goal. Would there be grounds for a replay because the winning goal was illegal? Of course not. A ref's error. Unfortunate for Crokes, but one of those things.

Crokes can try to blame the officials, but it's a dangerous precedent being set if Crokes win the All Ireland on the back of it.

Not saying Crokes did this but imagine how teams going forward could cause chaos and confusion at a critical point in a game throwing on sub after sub whilst trying to defend a lead. If they end up with one or two extra defenders to see out the game/win ahh sure it's the officials fault, nothing to do with us, we won the game fairly.

[seafoid]

KC are probably angling for a fine rather than a replay. Rules don't work via manipulation.

[Milltown Row2]

Imagine it was an unintentional mistake on both the officials and KC and  social has driven this ?

[thebuzz]

seafoid, you have over 100 posts on this topic... take a break...obsessed

And him from Galway
What have Galway got to do with kilmacud anyway, miles away

Good one Hoof 😀😀😀

[thebuzz]

Doherty and Glass are starting against Limerick tomorrow so they're not waiting for any replay.

[Silver hill]

Can't see how kilmacud can object

Their argument is they did nothing wrong.

They advised the officials they wanted to make the substitution.
The officials allowed the sub to come on.
The officials allowed the game to re-start without allowing time for Mullin to go off (or for anyone to tell Mullin that he was going off). 
The officials were notified of their error and did not order a retake.

Just a refereeing mistake. One of those things.  Unfortunate for Glen, but the rule everyone quotes is for when a club puts an extra player on without the permission of the officials. You can't penalise Crokes for the officials making a mistake.

That's how they can, and are, objecting.

During the 6 seconds of play where Crokes had 16 on the pitch, the Glen full back had a great chance to deflect the ball into the net, but missed. Imagine an alternative scenario where it was 15 v 15, and the full back got the crucial touch, the ball ended up in the net, the officials missed that he was in the square before the ball was played to him and wrongly allowed the goal. Would there be grounds for a replay because the winning goal was illegal? Of course not. A ref's error. Unfortunate for Crokes, but one of those things.

All irrelevant. They had 17 players on the field of play....it's not a credible defence to say 'he didn't know he had to go off' if that was the case then every future defence in rule breaking will be we didn't know. Wise up and stop being so naive.

[SHEEDY]

Can't see how kilmacud can object

Their argument is they did nothing wrong.

They advised the officials they wanted to make the substitution.
The officials allowed the sub to come on.
The officials allowed the game to re-start without allowing time for Mullin to go off (or for anyone to tell Mullin that he was going off). 
The officials were notified of their error and did not order a retake.

Just a refereeing mistake. One of those things.  Unfortunate for Glen, but the rule everyone quotes is for when a club puts an extra player on without the permission of the officials. You can't penalise Crokes for the officials making a mistake.

That's how they can, and are, objecting.

During the 6 seconds of play where Crokes had 16 on the pitch, the Glen full back had a great chance to deflect the ball into the net, but missed. Imagine an alternative scenario where it was 15 v 15, and the full back got the crucial touch, the ball ended up in the net, the officials missed that he was in the square before the ball was played to him and wrongly allowed the goal. Would there be grounds for a replay because the winning goal was illegal? Of course not. A ref's error. Unfortunate for Crokes, but one of those things.

this 100%, that's how I see it.