Extra-Time - is it really just another match?

[Doogie Browser]

But Zap the extra time is for all intents and purposes 'the same game' the advantage or disadvantage has been wiped out. 

[DUBSFORSAM1]

I notice that all the talk is about Dublin benefitting but not Cork benefitting....I agree it's a stupid rule which has cost us before and we got the benefit this time...

[Zapatista]

But Zap the extra time is for all intents and purposes 'the same game' the advantage or disadvantage has been wiped out.

That's a technicality that can be argued either way. The argument posted earlier is When a player shows indiscipline, he should be punished, he let the team down, the team have to struggle on without him. The punishment is that they have to play a man down.

Thay do struggle with a man down up to full time as they do in any given match.

Apart from technicalities should this not be applied to a Replay? If a player had have got lined in the first Cork Kerry game they would have been down one untill 70 mins but in the replay it would have been up to 90mins. Surely this would be wrong?

By right a replay should be subject to the same rules as ET.

[western exile]

5. If Extra-time is good enough for First Round and Provincial Quarter-Final games, then why not for Provincial Semi-Finals too?  What's so special about a Provincial Semi-Final fixture (like Kerry v Cork last week) that Extra-time could not be considered to be played in the first game?

I am of the opposite opinion.  Why should the quarter-finals be forced to extra time but later games get a replay?  Until last year, the age old rule was that extra time could only be used at a replay.  I think that was fairer.

[OverThePostsAWide]

I'm pretty sure you can start extra-time with 15 different players to those who finished normal time

Is that the case? Are full team sheets supplied or just substitution slips? Can any officials who have been through the business end of extra time confirm?

It is a fairly well established rule............. extra time is considered a "new game" (with restrictions).

Is it? Or is it just one of those sloppy phrases that gets its "truth" from repetition? If a team can't start with 15 new players then the only similarity with a new game is that teams start with the full complement of 15. In which case it would be better described as extra-time (with benefits).

To my mind, having yellow cards carry over into extra time is logical. Replacing a player sent off is the anomaly and should be done away with. It invites abuse of the "hatchet man" variety. And if anybody thinks it wouldn't happen at county level, just think water carriers  ...or the time when they experimented with the rule where wrestling was a yellow card for both "offenders". An awful lot of the best forwards in the country got involved in nonsensical wrestling matches during that period 

[OverThePostsAWide]

But Zap the extra time is for all intents and purposes 'the same game' the advantage or disadvantage has been wiped out.

That's a technicality that can be argued either way. The argument posted earlier is When a player shows indiscipline, he should be punished, he let the team down, the team have to struggle on without him. The punishment is that they have to play a man down.

Thay do struggle with a man down up to full time as they do in any given match.

Apart from technicalities should this not be applied to a Replay? If a player had have got lined in the first Cork Kerry game they would have been down one untill 70 mins but in the replay it would have been up to 90mins. Surely this would be wrong?

By right a replay should be subject to the same rules as ET.

Not at all. A replay is a new game with new players, new officials and often a new venue. The logical extension of your reasoning is that sending offs should be cumulative throughout the championship. Dublin would then find themselves starting a Leinster final with 11 men 

Wait a minute, not a bad idea...

[The Biff]

It's the Double-Standards interpretations that really annoy me, i.e. it's a "new game" in some ways but not others.  But sure the GAA Rules will never be a hallmark of consistency.

By the way, any examples I give about Dublin v Wexford should not be interpreted as me being anti-Dublin.  It's just using this recent game for practical examples of the anomalies that can and have arisen.

My own view boils down to an acceptance that it is basically ridiculous to try to consider Extra Time as a new game.  Such a notion is so wrong on so many levels.

• It's only 20 minutes in total, not even as long as one half of a regular game.
• The players are not starting afresh.  They are tired, their form is now based on a previous 70+ minutes action, some may now be carrying knocks, some may be demoralised because they've not played up to their own expectations, etc. etc.
• The momentum of how the Extra Time is likely to swing is entirely dependent on which team has probably finished stronger during normal time.
• Hound's assertion above that the manager could actually change all 15 players - I've never heard that before; can anyone verify that or not?
• I feel it is correct that Yellow Cards in Normal Time should continue to apply in Extra Time, and this principle should be matched that Red Cards in Normal Time are not effectively discarded by the team in Extra Time.  The current situation is so hypocritical in that the more serious offence carries a lesser team penalty into Extra Time.
• I have no problem with additional subs being used in Extra Time.  In last Sunday's example, Wexford's failure to use more subs probably reflects their Management feeling they would not have been better than the tired players already on the field.  We can't argue that point.  However Dublin gained very significantly by being able to call on 5 new players at that point.  Having that number of strong players available to call on reflects well on the strength of their panel.  However I feel they should only have been able to use 3 new players, and still be limited to 13 in total on the field.
• There should be NO room in the rules where a "hatchet man" can be allowed to effectively help his team by an act of "self sacrifice".  If this is a loophole, it should be plugged.
• Finally, we all know the impact that County fixtures have on Club fixtures.  That is the basis for bringing in the rule about Extra Time in early round games this year.  But given the inequalities in the four provinces, this rule change has far less impact in Connacht or Munster than in the other two.  It only serves to widen those inequalities further, and does not serve to minimise the impact on Club fixtures.  Once more, the GAA Rules only pay lip service to the slogan that the Club is the most important element of the organisation.  This seems to be the case only when it does not clash when County Board priorities.

[Lecale2]

I would be in favour of this rule. It's what keeps our games different from the rest.

[put-it-up]

For me extra-time is not a new-game. It's a continuatiuon of the game to try and find a conclusuion. I am against teams being allowed to replace a man that has been sent-off. If they were indisciplined through normal time then they should have to suffer the consequences.

[Rossfan]

You name a fresh 15 at the start of extra time ...but they have to be from the official list of 24 or whatever handed to the Officials before the start of normal time.
This was clarified by Central Council after last years Ros/Kerry Minor Q.F as there were allegations that Kerry had used too many subs.

[EagleLord]

This notion of firing on a new whole team is also brutal!

[OverThePostsAWide]

I would be in favour of this rule. It's what keeps our games different from the rest.

Good man Lecale, that really lifts the debate 

You wouldn't be a Central Council delegate by any chance?

[Lecale2]

No. Why do you ask that?

[Zapatista]

Not at all. A replay is a new game with new players, new officials and often a new venue. The logical extension of your reasoning is that sending offs should be cumulative throughout the championship. Dublin would then find themselves starting a Leinster final with 11 men 

Wait a minute, not a bad idea...

I'm not much sood at this, I thought I was arguing against that.

I don't know how sports other than soccer do it. The difference with soccer is that in Knockout tournaments they go as far as having penaltys in order to secure a winner regardless. I think it's just a different train of thought. They want a result at any cost.

[Bogball XV]

I would be in favour of this rule. It's what keeps our games different from the rest.

if we had both sets of players perform a tug of war that would be different from most other sports too (barring tug of war of course).
The current situation is illogical, we've had the examples of both Antrim in the hurling and Wexford in the football over the past few weeks playing against and losing to teams who went back to full strength for extra time, yet if any of their players had picked up another yellow, they'd have been off, it's just stupid.  Of course you can pedal that auld shite about how they had their chance to bate them in normal time etc, but it ignores fair play, and i'll repeat, it's illogical.