Author Topic: Armagh v Tyrone U20  (Read 22172 times)

keeperlit

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 30
    • View Profile
Re: Armagh v Tyrone U20
« Reply #90 on: June 13, 2018, 12:44:11 PM »
immediately following the row, both teams had 2 players sent off. Armagh also had a management member sent off. Play then resumed, Following the next whistle to end the period another Armagh player was sent off after the whistle. This would suggest they should have had a player less on the field than tyrone when they resumed. I'm assuming tyrones appeal is based on this.

No- because one of the two armagh players that was sent off immediately following the row had already been substituted in normal time iirc.

smelmoth

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 972
    • View Profile
Re: Armagh v Tyrone U20
« Reply #91 on: June 13, 2018, 01:12:30 PM »
Anybody know the exact basis of the appeal? As in actual facts.

The issues of punishing the teams/ county boards and individuals appears to be entirely separate to this appeal. Is there any update on those punishments?

JoG2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3000
    • View Profile
Re: Armagh v Tyrone U20
« Reply #92 on: June 13, 2018, 01:20:13 PM »
Anybody know the exact basis of the appeal? As in actual facts.

The issues of punishing the teams/ county boards and individuals appears to be entirely separate to this appeal. Is there any update on those punishments?

Tyrone are appealing on a technicality. Extra extra time is down as a continuation of extra time and not 'a new game' as per the rules. Even though both teams would have been happy enough to go back from 13 each to 15 (both obviously didn't know the rule or were happy enough to say nothing), Tyrone want the result scrapped on this technicality

bigtogs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 433
    • View Profile
Re: Armagh v Tyrone U20
« Reply #93 on: June 13, 2018, 01:22:07 PM »
Anybody know the exact basis of the appeal? As in actual facts.

The issues of punishing the teams/ county boards and individuals appears to be entirely separate to this appeal. Is there any update on those punishments?

Tyrone are appealing on a technicality. Extra extra time is down as a continuation of extra time and not 'a new game' as per the rules. Even though both teams would have been happy enough to go back from 13 each to 15 (both obviously didn't know the rule or were happy enough to say nothing), Tyrone want the result scrapped on this technicality
y


I heard today Ulster council owner custard Donnelly advised Tyrone on the ruling and his advise was wrong!!

JoG2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3000
    • View Profile
Re: Armagh v Tyrone U20
« Reply #94 on: June 13, 2018, 01:24:30 PM »
Anybody know the exact basis of the appeal? As in actual facts.

The issues of punishing the teams/ county boards and individuals appears to be entirely separate to this appeal. Is there any update on those punishments?

Tyrone are appealing on a technicality. Extra extra time is down as a continuation of extra time and not 'a new game' as per the rules. Even though both teams would have been happy enough to go back from 13 each to 15 (both obviously didn't know the rule or were happy enough to say nothing), Tyrone want the result scrapped on this technicality
y


I heard today Ulster council owner custard Donnelly advised Tyrone on the ruling and his advise was wrong!!

Going on what was reported in the IN today 'togs

bigtogs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 433
    • View Profile
Re: Armagh v Tyrone U20
« Reply #95 on: June 13, 2018, 01:30:54 PM »
Anybody know the exact basis of the appeal? As in actual facts.

The issues of punishing the teams/ county boards and individuals appears to be entirely separate to this appeal. Is there any update on those punishments?

Tyrone are appealing on a technicality. Extra extra time is down as a continuation of extra time and not 'a new game' as per the rules. Even though both teams would have been happy enough to go back from 13 each to 15 (both obviously didn't know the rule or were happy enough to say nothing), Tyrone want the result scrapped on this technicality
y


I heard today Ulster council owner custard Donnelly advised Tyrone on the ruling and his advise was wrong!!

Going on what was reported in the IN today 'togs

Never seen IN today but the man that told me must be going by that!!

smelmoth

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 972
    • View Profile
Re: Armagh v Tyrone U20
« Reply #96 on: June 13, 2018, 01:33:31 PM »
Anybody know the exact basis of the appeal? As in actual facts.

The issues of punishing the teams/ county boards and individuals appears to be entirely separate to this appeal. Is there any update on those punishments?

Tyrone are appealing on a technicality. Extra extra time is down as a continuation of extra time and not 'a new game' as per the rules. Even though both teams would have been happy enough to go back from 13 each to 15 (both obviously didn't know the rule or were happy enough to say nothing), Tyrone want the result scrapped on this technicality

I wasn't at the game but was there not a delay before the start of extra extra time to get some clarity on that very point? Presumably Tyrone made their objections clear at that stage and played the extra extra time under protest??

I presume Tyrone accept that they have in no way been disadvantaged by the ref's ruling on the day?
« Last Edit: June 13, 2018, 01:35:37 PM by smelmoth »

Aaron Boone

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2169
    • View Profile
Re: Armagh v Tyrone U20
« Reply #97 on: June 13, 2018, 01:48:52 PM »
Fairness dictates a replay.

Tony Baloney

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13835
    • View Profile
Re: Armagh v Tyrone U20
« Reply #98 on: June 13, 2018, 01:52:45 PM »
Fairness dictates a replay.
Of course you would not be saying this if the roles were reversed.

The Bearded One

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Armagh v Tyrone U20
« Reply #99 on: June 13, 2018, 02:01:27 PM »
At the end of extra time Armagh had a third player sent off (after the row and the equalising score). They commenced extra extra time with 15 players when they should have had 12 and Tyrone 13.
It is what it is.

WT4E

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1369
    • View Profile
Re: Armagh v Tyrone U20
« Reply #100 on: June 13, 2018, 02:01:36 PM »
Anybody know the exact basis of the appeal? As in actual facts.

The issues of punishing the teams/ county boards and individuals appears to be entirely separate to this appeal. Is there any update on those punishments?

Tyrone are appealing on a technicality. Extra extra time is down as a continuation of extra time and not 'a new game' as per the rules. Even though both teams would have been happy enough to go back from 13 each to 15 (both obviously didn't know the rule or were happy enough to say nothing), Tyrone want the result scrapped on this technicality

Armagh went from 12 to 15 and Tyrone from 13 to 15

outsideoftheboot

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 53
    • View Profile
Re: Armagh v Tyrone U20
« Reply #101 on: June 13, 2018, 02:07:20 PM »
At the end of extra time Armagh had a third player sent off (after the row and the equalising score). They commenced extra extra time with 15 players when they should have had 12 and Tyrone 13.

I have stated this numerous times.. one argument above was that one of the players was already subbed off..

mackers

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1415
    • View Profile
Re: Armagh v Tyrone U20
« Reply #102 on: June 13, 2018, 02:13:16 PM »
Fairness dictates a replay.
We'll agree if you agree to replay the 03 AI final  ;)
Keep your pecker hard and your powder dry and the world will turn.

GJL

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1566
    • View Profile
Re: Armagh v Tyrone U20
« Reply #103 on: June 13, 2018, 02:16:29 PM »

keeperlit

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 30
    • View Profile
Re: Armagh v Tyrone U20
« Reply #104 on: June 13, 2018, 02:29:08 PM »
At the end of extra time Armagh had a third player sent off (after the row and the equalising score). They commenced extra extra time with 15 players when they should have had 12 and Tyrone 13.

Wrong. They had one player and a sub red carded before game resumed after row (14 vs 13). They then had a player sent of after the game resumed (about 15 seconds later) but before the equaliser (leaving it 13 vs 13).