Disciplinary hearings are destroying the game

[Canalman]

Told yes. The Keane decision made it a slam dunk .

Decisions not to charge Philly , COC with anything made it a formality. Imo of course.

[Canalman]

Think about the reaction of every GAA referee and every potential GAA referee in the land when they heard this.

When the GAA's disciplinary procedures seem to undermine them at every single turn, is it any wonder that refereeing standards aren't higher.

The GAA disciplinary process just constantly kicks referees in the teeth as opposed to supporting them.

Totally agree.

[muppet]

The counties themselves need to take responsibility for this for appealing these clearcut decisions in the first place.
Mayo and dublin this year and Tyrone, kerry and others inches past.
No one seems to be able to say,  fair cop and and take a justified suspension.

No they don't the GAA needs to take responsibility for never rewriting the Disciplinary Rulebook despite promising to do so on several occasions.
The buck stops with them

So you think Dublin were right to appeal this?
And mayo right to appeal keanes?

Dublin were 100% right to appeal it.

Of course they were.

I can't believe lads are complaining about the decisions to appeal. Look at the risk/reward. Zero risk versus huge chance of reward.

Yes it is a serious blight on the games but you can't blame Keane or the DCB.

The problem is with the top level administrators.

[Catch and Kick]

Lot of comment on here defending referees. This decision has nothing to do with refereeing.
The whole process is flawed from the very beginning of the reporting of incidents.
Yet if we start with referees, they are part of the problem too.
Referees can be vindictive and some of them go to the rule book before they writer their report.
They are not content to report a player they have sent off but they take it further and want to decide the length of suspension a player receives. That is the function of the committee dealing with the report - and the refs know this. By consulting the rule book they can report the incident to ensure the committee MUST impose the higher suspension. After that the appeals system cannot commute or give the appropriate suspension. That's a fact and it happens.
This is an abuse of their position.
At club level how often have we seen referees not sending off players for clear striking actions - depending on who it is?

County Boards, Provincial and Croke Park Committees are past masters at confusing everyone with their rulings and interpretations. And even though it's not in the rule book, 'common sense' or 'natural justice' has no place in the system - when clearly there are occasions when it must apply.

To my mind layers of the appeal system need to be done away with.
A Disciplinary Commissioner should be given power to adjudicate on controversial decisions - or non decisions.
Both sides should present their evidence and hear it being presented by the other side and have an opportunity to refute it; the Commissioner should also be able to use video evidence as he sees fit.
The Commissioner should be able to speak in plain English and not hide behind rules.
There the matter should rest.
Committees should be done away with - there are too many of them, too many committee members play politics,  too many of them re there for the expenses, too many of them are career committee members and they are intimidating for individuals to appeal to.
In addition the heads of the CCC and the CHC are both solicitors and can baffle and bamboozle appellants. They are both of impeccable character BUT justice is not being served and they know it. To them it's almost like their version of playing the game. It's a contest between their legal proficiency and that of the individual.
Time to end the nonsense.

[Main Street]

Brolly covered this in his article last week... The rules were written by laymen and being picked apart by top of the range legal teams. The sooner they rewrite the rulebook with legal guidance the better.

The appeals committees are ordinary lads up against a top of the range legal team but when the legal cases are brought to the DRA the rules are being pored over to a degree not foreseen when they were written.

Horrible decision but not surprising. With the resources The GAA have available there is no excuse for our rulebook to be picked apart so easily and so often!!

The rules were certainly not written by laymen, but laymen are involved in making sure all the rules of procedure are being followed. The rules of procedure may be cumbersome and impractical, I don't know I haven't read them that carefully, regardless the GAA would need a legal expert to make sure all procedures are followed in a disciplinary process, but not involve them in the adjudication.
A player is allowed a 2nd appeal  but it is restricted  to appeal against the procedures as laid out in the official guide.

The entire matter of the rules of procedure being followed, should be dealt with in the one appeal, the first and only appeal.

[AZOffaly]

I saw the DRA wording. The process didnt allow connolly to prepare his defence. Nothing about keane coc or mcmahon. And it smells like bullshit.

[Milltown Row2]

The referee should just yellow card Connelly twice in quick succession ... Job done... Referees must ferl like shit at that level...most at club level the player takes his punishment

[Captain Obvious]

Show me the money...

[Milltown Row2]

Lot of comment on here defending referees. This decision has nothing to do with refereeing.
The whole process is flawed from the very beginning of the reporting of incidents.
Yet if we start with referees, they are part of the problem too.
Referees can be vindictive and some of them go to the rule book before they writer their report.
They are not content to report a player they have sent off but they take it further and want to decide the length of suspension a player receives. That is the function of the committee dealing with the report - and the refs know this. By consulting the rule book they can report the incident to ensure the committee MUST impose the higher suspension. After that the appeals system cannot commute or give the appropriate suspension. That's a fact and it happens.
This is an abuse of their position.
At club level how often have we seen referees not sending off players for clear striking actions - depending on who it is?

County Boards, Provincial and Croke Park Committees are past masters at confusing everyone with their rulings and interpretations. And even though it's not in the rule book, 'common sense' or 'natural justice' has no place in the system - when clearly there are occasions when it must apply.

To my mind layers of the appeal system need to be done away with.
A Disciplinary Commissioner should be given power to adjudicate on controversial decisions - or non decisions.
Both sides should present their evidence and hear it being presented by the other side and have an opportunity to refute it; the Commissioner should also be able to use video evidence as he sees fit.
The Commissioner should be able to speak in plain English and not hide behind rules.
There the matter should rest.
Committees should be done away with - there are too many of them, too many committee members play politics,  too many of them re there for the expenses, too many of them are career committee members and they are intimidating for individuals to appeal to.
In addition the heads of the CCC and the CHC are both solicitors and can baffle and bamboozle appellants. They are both of impeccable character BUT justice is not being served and they know it. To them it's almost like their version of playing the game. It's a contest between their legal proficiency and that of the individual.
Time to end the nonsense.

Just cause you say the word fact doesn't make it fact!!  When someone punches a player twice in gbe face while he's on the ground and gets away with it is a nonsense... Saying all referees look to the rule book after match is over to write up a report is another nonsense

[heffo]

I saw the DRA wording. The process didnt allow connolly to prepare his defence. Nothing about keane coc or mcmahon. And it smells like bullshit.

I believe he requested information he was entitled to know at the first stage and which wasn't provided.

[Catch and Kick]

Lot of comment on here defending referees. This decision has nothing to do with refereeing.
The whole process is flawed from the very beginning of the reporting of incidents.
Yet if we start with referees, they are part of the problem too.
Referees can be vindictive and some of them go to the rule book before they writer their report.
They are not content to report a player they have sent off but they take it further and want to decide the length of suspension a player receives. That is the function of the committee dealing with the report - and the refs know this. By consulting the rule book they can report the incident to ensure the committee MUST impose the higher suspension. After that the appeals system cannot commute or give the appropriate suspension. That's a fact and it happens.
This is an abuse of their position.
At club level how often have we seen referees not sending off players for clear striking actions - depending on who it is?

County Boards, Provincial and Croke Park Committees are past masters at confusing everyone with their rulings and interpretations. And even though it's not in the rule book, 'common sense' or 'natural justice' has no place in the system - when clearly there are occasions when it must apply.

To my mind layers of the appeal system need to be done away with.
A Disciplinary Commissioner should be given power to adjudicate on controversial decisions - or non decisions.
Both sides should present their evidence and hear it being presented by the other side and have an opportunity to refute it; the Commissioner should also be able to use video evidence as he sees fit.
The Commissioner should be able to speak in plain English and not hide behind rules.
There the matter should rest.
Committees should be done away with - there are too many of them, too many committee members play politics,  too many of them re there for the expenses, too many of them are career committee members and they are intimidating for individuals to appeal to.
In addition the heads of the CCC and the CHC are both solicitors and can baffle and bamboozle appellants. They are both of impeccable character BUT justice is not being served and they know it. To them it's almost like their version of playing the game. It's a contest between their legal proficiency and that of the individual.
Time to end the nonsense.

Just cause you say the word fact doesn't make it fact!!  When someone punches a player twice in gbe face while he's on the ground and gets away with it is a nonsense... Saying all referees look to the rule book after match is over to write up a report is another nonsense

I've been involved with teams for many years and it does happen. I didn't say every referee - I said 'some'.
I didn't dispute the fact that he struck him twice on the ground. He didn't get off for not striking! That's the whole point - technicalities are more important than fact and justice.
The disciplinary process is completely dominated by doing things right instead of doing the right thing....
Read my post again!

[Throw ball]

Serious question lads. When was the last suspension actually upheld? I said earlier i wouldnt be surprised if he got off because it is such a shambles but it is the wrong decision.

Armagh had 3 players suspended last year following Cavan brawl. These were upheld. Obviously they could have done with Dublin lawyers! Feel it is obvious that DRA only rule on procedure. I heard last year that Armagh had proof that one of their players had been punched 4 times before he hit back. The Cavan player was not banned. They were told it was not up to them to decide who should be banned but if procedures had been properly followed.

[Catch and Kick]

Serious question lads. When was the last suspension actually upheld? I said earlier i wouldnt be surprised if he got off because it is such a shambles but it is the wrong decision.

Armagh had 3 players suspended last year following Cavan brawl. These were upheld. Obviously they could have done with Dublin lawyers! Feel it is obvious that DRA only rule on procedure. I heard last year that Armagh had proof that one of their players had been punched 4 times before he hit back. The Cavan player was not banned. They were told it was not up to them to decide who should be banned but if procedures had been properly followed.

This is a great example of the failure of the system. Of course he should have been suspended but so should his opponent, who should possibly have got a longer suspension.

[SuperHo]

Read during the week (irish times?) that both panels that refused DOCs appeal had members who had previously served on the DRA. So how did it get to the DRA?  If the first hearings are factual and DRA is procedural then what is the f in point?

[heffo]

Serious question lads. When was the last suspension actually upheld? I said earlier i wouldnt be surprised if he got off because it is such a shambles but it is the wrong decision.

Armagh had 3 players suspended last year following Cavan brawl. These were upheld. Obviously they could have done with Dublin lawyers! Feel it is obvious that DRA only rule on procedure. I heard last year that Armagh had proof that one of their players had been punched 4 times before he hit back. The Cavan player was not banned. They were told it was not up to them to decide who should be banned but if procedures had been properly followed.

This is a great example of the failure of the system. Of course he should have been suspended but so should his opponent, who should possibly have got a longer suspension.

And the 3rd man in who was involved in a number of other incidents. All the rest of the posts about the integrity of the system are bullshit - he was deliberately targetted and wasn't the agressor.