Appeals

[trailer]

The whole GAA disciplinary system is broken. One of the main issues is the hap hazard consistency in which rules are applied. The same rules seem to be applied to different counties at the same time for the same offences even within the one incident. Ridiculous and what actually needs to happen is a red out right at the very very top of the organisation. Too many on the gravy train. Clear out and start again with PAID administrators who will be accountable and who have the best interest of the GAA at heart. Not these self serving officials.

[David McKeown]

End of the day, procedure or not, Rian O'Neill should been suspended, as to the Donegal Goalkeeper also.How after all these years men cannot be suspended on video evidence is ridiculous.

We will agree to disagree on that one.

[David McKeown]

I'm really quite frustrated by all this shite.

Every fuckwit player and mentor in Ireland will now again be convinced that the appeals process always delivers the result you want. Cue another busy year for hearings committees up and down the country, where little Johnny says "I've been training since new year's day for this match, and to miss it for handbags, it'll break me, I may never play again".

f**k that.

Few things.

1. Armagh only had one appeal. The CCCC recommended a sanction. Armagh could either accept that or ask for a hearing. They asked for a hearing where in the case of O'Neill the suspension was dismissed because it had not be brought in a procedurally fair manner. Therefore the merits of it did not have to be discussed. The suspensions of the other three were upheld on the basis that the referees report is gospel. There only appeal against that decision was to the Central Appeals Committee. So there wasn't and aren't endless appeals in this matter. It's similar to other sports that allow for retrospective punishment.

2. No one had their ban over turned on the basis of any kind of sob story. Either the bans weren't fair or they weren't accurate.

3. If we as an association don't want this to continue then we need to do something about it. It's a farce that melee isn't defined in the rule book (although interestingly it is in International Rules). It's a farce that no one knows why certain players are picked out but others aren't. Attempts have been made to improve things but they can't get through council. There is no excuse for the association not to have a robust and well written rule book. There is no excuse for the association not having clear and transparent procedures. The true farce out of all of this is that nothing will likely change.

Have to agree. What constitutes "contributing to a melee" is too ambiguous. Is it only physical or are verbal contributions included? Is someone trying to split up a melee contributing? Is being within 2m of a melee contributing?

But where does this end?  We'll need rules for everything to do with every action a player does?

Btw, I thought there was a rule that 3rd man in etc. gets a red card. Is this still in action?

Would this not stop a melee if enforced?

As far as I am aware there's no such rule. You don't need everything defined to the nth degree you simply need to avoid wildly undefined offences. Plenty of sports are able to do it very successfully. There seems however to be a complete refusal to do it in the GAA.

[David McKeown]

Honestly David while you're clearly trying to be level headed about this, you're barking up the wrong tree looking for clear definitions for everything that may constitute foul play.

No sporting association in the world attempts to defines a melee in law. They instead, like GAA, have a catch-all disrepute charge, that can be employed as needed.

The biggest problem with GAA disciplinary process is NOT the rule book as you suggest: that's a complete cop out. The problem is cultural. Short of putting a man in hospital, players and their entire support, expect red cards to be overturned. It's absolutely f**king ludicrous. It needs to change.

Few things again.

1. You don't need to define everything you simply need to avoid hideously I'll defined things. Such as contributing to a melee. For fairness to exist an individual needs to know that what they are doing is an offence. A better way to think of it may be if you ask. How did he contribute to the melee?  If your answer is by contributing to a melee that's not sufficiently certain enough to constitute an offence.

2. Contrary to your assertion a number of sports define a melee, ice hockey, rugby league and bizarrely International Rules for example. Others don't but then they also don't have a specific penalty for contributing to a melee.

3.  On your final point I think one leads to the other. Players will not and should not be expected to sit back and take a penalty they perceive to be an injustice. You start with a proper robust rule book that ensures fairness I think you start to see far less appeals. If there are far less appeals then that improves faith in the rule book etc etc

[Mourne Red]

I'm really quite frustrated by all this shite.

Every fuckwit player and mentor in Ireland will now again be convinced that the appeals process always delivers the result you want. Cue another busy year for hearings committees up and down the country, where little Johnny says "I've been training since new year's day for this match, and to miss it for handbags, it'll break me, I may never play again".

f**k that.

Few things.

1. Armagh only had one appeal. The CCCC recommended a sanction. Armagh could either accept that or ask for a hearing. They asked for a hearing where in the case of O'Neill the suspension was dismissed because it had not be brought in a procedurally fair manner. Therefore the merits of it did not have to be discussed. The suspensions of the other three were upheld on the basis that the referees report is gospel. There only appeal against that decision was to the Central Appeals Committee. So there wasn't and aren't endless appeals in this matter. It's similar to other sports that allow for retrospective punishment.

2. No one had their ban over turned on the basis of any kind of sob story. Either the bans weren't fair or they weren't accurate.

3. If we as an association don't want this to continue then we need to do something about it. It's a farce that melee isn't defined in the rule book (although interestingly it is in International Rules). It's a farce that no one knows why certain players are picked out but others aren't. Attempts have been made to improve things but they can't get through council. There is no excuse for the association not to have a robust and well written rule book. There is no excuse for the association not having clear and transparent procedures. The true farce out of all of this is that nothing will likely change.

Have to agree. What constitutes "contributing to a melee" is too ambiguous. Is it only physical or are verbal contributions included? Is someone trying to split up a melee contributing? Is being within 2m of a melee contributing?

But where does this end?  We'll need rules for everything to do with every action a player does?

Btw, I thought there was a rule that 3rd man in etc. gets a red card. Is this still in action?

Would this not stop a melee if enforced?

As far as I am aware there's no such rule. You don't need everything defined to the nth degree you simply need to avoid wildly undefined offences. Plenty of sports are able to do it very successfully. There seems however to be a complete refusal to do it in the GAA.

There apparently is a rule for 3rd man in - I only say this because I was guilty of going in and the ref read that rule out to me and gave me a red card.. It must go by ref though as I have seen it done on plenty of other matches but no reds given

[thewobbler]

Honestly David while you're clearly trying to be level headed about this, you're barking up the wrong tree looking for clear definitions for everything that may constitute foul play.

No sporting association in the world attempts to defines a melee in law. They instead, like GAA, have a catch-all disrepute charge, that can be employed as needed.

The biggest problem with GAA disciplinary process is NOT the rule book as you suggest: that's a complete cop out. The problem is cultural. Short of putting a man in hospital, players and their entire support, expect red cards to be overturned. It's absolutely f**king ludicrous. It needs to change.

Few things again.

1. You don't need to define everything you simply need to avoid hideously I'll defined things. Such as contributing to a melee. For fairness to exist an individual needs to know that what they are doing is an offence. A better way to think of it may be if you ask. How did he contribute to the melee?  If your answer is by contributing to a melee that's not sufficiently certain enough to constitute an offence.

2. Contrary to your assertion a number of sports define a melee, ice hockey, rugby league and bizarrely International Rules for example. Others don't but then they also don't have a specific penalty for contributing to a melee.

3.  On your final point I think one leads to the other. Players will not and should not be expected to sit back and take a penalty they perceive to be an injustice. You start with a proper robust rule book that ensures fairness I think you start to see far less appeals. If there are far less appeals then that improves faith in the rule book etc etc

The only difference between the acceptance of sanctions in the GAA and association football, is cultural.

[Wildweasel74]

So in short, we shouldnt believe what we see In Front of our eyes. G that Rule 1 out of the Trump playbook.

[David McKeown]

Honestly David while you're clearly trying to be level headed about this, you're barking up the wrong tree looking for clear definitions for everything that may constitute foul play.

No sporting association in the world attempts to defines a melee in law. They instead, like GAA, have a catch-all disrepute charge, that can be employed as needed.

The biggest problem with GAA disciplinary process is NOT the rule book as you suggest: that's a complete cop out. The problem is cultural. Short of putting a man in hospital, players and their entire support, expect red cards to be overturned. It's absolutely f**king ludicrous. It needs to change.

Few things again.

1. You don't need to define everything you simply need to avoid hideously I'll defined things. Such as contributing to a melee. For fairness to exist an individual needs to know that what they are doing is an offence. A better way to think of it may be if you ask. How did he contribute to the melee?  If your answer is by contributing to a melee that's not sufficiently certain enough to constitute an offence.

2. Contrary to your assertion a number of sports define a melee, ice hockey, rugby league and bizarrely International Rules for example. Others don't but then they also don't have a specific penalty for contributing to a melee.

3.  On your final point I think one leads to the other. Players will not and should not be expected to sit back and take a penalty they perceive to be an injustice. You start with a proper robust rule book that ensures fairness I think you start to see far less appeals. If there are far less appeals then that improves faith in the rule book etc etc

The only difference between the acceptance of sanctions in the GAA and association football, is cultural.

I'm not sure I agree with that given the number of cases from here that have ended up before CAS recently. I think if a suspension is thought of as fair and applied across the board it's accepted. If it's thought of as unfair it's challenged

[yellowcard]

According to the Irish News today Rian O'Neill got his suspension overturned due to the fact that the video evidence used was not official footage. Whatever that means. His was the only suspension I thought might be justified in the first instance even if there was an argument to be had in terms of the actual force of the striking action. I'm not sure how the other lads managed to get off given that they were in the initial referees report.

It is good for Armagh and the right outcome was eventually reached but it does make a bit of a mockery of the GAA disciplinary system.

[Milltown Row2]

It's a nonsense and there is a requirement by the GAA to make the rules fit for purpose in regards to red card offences and make it plain.

Referee's up and down the country are talking about this and its not a reflection on them to be fair, they can only use follow the rules and what happens at appeal level is down to them.

The frustration is that this has been going on for a while and nothing done or even been seen to be looked at, more concerned in bringing in forward marks sin bins and whatever else they feel might improve the game, but if they actually looked at sorting out the real problems first then that would be better ..

[J70]

So the take home message from this is "all in lads - if you get punished, we'll appeal it and most likely get you off".

Back to business as usual for the GAA when it comes to discipline.

[JoG2]

According to the Irish News today Rian O'Neill got his suspension overturned due to the fact that the video evidence used was not official footage. Whatever that means. His was the only suspension I thought might be justified in the first instance even if there was an argument to be had in terms of the actual force of the striking action. I'm not sure how the other lads managed to get off given that they were in the initial referees report.

It is good for Armagh and the right outcome was eventually reached but it does make a bit of a mockery of the GAA disciplinary system.

Well that's a load of nonsense for a start.. Any video evidence can be used

[Armagh18]

According to the Irish News today Rian O'Neill got his suspension overturned due to the fact that the video evidence used was not official footage. Whatever that means. His was the only suspension I thought might be justified in the first instance even if there was an argument to be had in terms of the actual force of the striking action. I'm not sure how the other lads managed to get off given that they were in the initial referees report.

It is good for Armagh and the right outcome was eventually reached but it does make a bit of a mockery of the GAA disciplinary system.

Well that's a load of nonsense for a start.. Any video evidence can be used

Are you sure? Have heard that before about not official footage

[armaghniac]

So the take home message from this is "all in lads - if you get punished, we'll appeal it and most likely get you off".

Back to business as usual for the GAA when it comes to discipline.

As long as only 3 or 4 are punished from a dozen involved then there is no real justice.

[rosnarun]

1. Armagh only had one appeal. The CCCC recommended a sanction. Armagh could either accept that or ask for a hearing. They asked for a hearing where in the case of O'Neill the suspension was dismissed because it had not be brought in a procedurally fair manner. Therefore the merits of it did not have to be discussed. The suspensions of the other three were upheld on the basis that the referees report is gospel. There only appeal against that decision was to the Central Appeals Committee. So there wasn't and aren't endless appeals in this matter. It's similar to other sports that allow for retrospective punishment.

was this explained further . some one must have fecked up . if the procedure to apply aban in a sport is that unclear no wonder were all going round in circles