All-Ireland Football Qualifiers 2016

[Keyser Söze]

The letter above and the GAA website both say REPLAY.
That is crucial

[south Laois]

Still no word from Armagh. Is it set in stone that it's in Portlaoise?

[Kuwabatake Sanjuro]

Still no word from Armagh. Is it set in stone that it's in Portlaoise?

Portarlington might be more suitable with the expected crowd.

[muppet]

The letter above and the GAA website both say REPLAY.
That is crucial

Regarding the letter, there is an obvious typo and 'Saturday July 2 at 3.0' is not a format I've ever seen used before. For example, what is '3.0'? Pretty shabby stuff for an official letter.

[Junior Ex Laoistalk]

This explains the situation in full...

Armagh get second qualifier crack at Laois after sub mix-up

By Peter Sweeney | Updated: Tuesday, 21 Jun 2016 20:43 | 5 Comments


Laois will have to replay their All-Ireland Senior Football Championship Round 1A qualifier with Armagh after using one too many substitutes in their win over the Orchard County.

The match will take place on Saturday, 2 July at O'Moore Park with a 3.0 throw-in.

Mick Lillis's team had already used their full allocation of six replacements when they sent on Shane Murphy in second half stoppage-time to take over from Brendan Quigley, who had been sent off following a black card.

This meant that they used seven substitutes – one more than is allowed.

Under rule, Croke Park's Central Competition Control Committee (CCCC) could have awarded the game to Armagh, fined Laois, or ordered a replay and they have opted for the latter.

Laois won at O'Moore Park on Saturday by 1-10 to 0-10, but only led by two points when Quigley was black carded and Murphy came into the action.

They sealed their victory and progress to round two – or so they thought – when Ross Munnelly scored a point to put a goal between the sides with the last kick of the game.

Laois were clearly the better team on the day, but their wasteful shooting ensured that they didn't win by more.

Had they pulled clear in the closing stages, the GAA may have settled on a fine and allowed the result to stand. But as it was a one-score game they opted for a replay.

"There was a proposed punishment put to us by the CCCC, we accepted it and the match has been refixed. Our reaction is to get on with it," said Laois County Board Chairman Gerry Kavanagh, speaking to RTÉ Sport.

"We're disappointed for the players because they put in a huge effort on the day and thought they'd done enough to get into the next round.

"But we are responsible. It's our job to discharge the rules properly, we didn't do that so we are where we are now."

This wasn't the only substitution mix-up at the game on Saturday.

Armagh's Tony Kernan came off in error after the fourth official put up the wrong number on the board and it took several minutes to rectify the situation.

In a statement released on Tuesday night, the GAA said: "Following an enquiry form the CCCC arising from the Round 1A Football Qualifier between Laois v Armagh on Saturday June 18, it has been confirmed that one extra substitute was used by Laois in error.

"CCCC have proposed in accordance with rule, that this game should be replayed on Saturday July 2 at 3.0 in Portlaoise.

"Laois have accepted this proposal."

There is one good point to come out of this for Laois however, with John O'Loughlin deemed to have served his one-game suspension and will be eligible for the replay.

The influential O'Loughlin was sent off in the Leinster quarter-final defeat to Dublin, picking up the automatic one match ban.

[Unison]

They say 'jump', and we say 'how high?'. This is the second time we have offered a replay to opposition. God love us, but we are so humble, meek and obliging.

It seems our purpose within the GAA, is not to win anything, but to be a diversion, a laughing stock. Is it any wonder supporters are so frustrated with Laois GAA, they have stopped going to matches?

[Giovanni]

I would love to know the role of Armagh in all of this. The official letter says:

"Following an enquiry form (sic???) the CCCC arising from the Round 1A Football Qualifier between Laois v Armagh on Saturday June 18...". The question is what prompted this enquiry?

The letter goes on to say - ""CCCC have proposed in accordance with rule, that this game should be replayed on Saturday July 2 at 3.0 in Portlaoise." In accordance with rule.... The actual rule that led to this proposal has not been announced. I wonder why?

According to the Independent, there seems to be 2 essential reasons why they decided to award a replay rather than a fine. The first, which is completely ludicrous, is that if they imposed a fine it would set a precedent! But if a fine is one of the options open to them according to the rules, what is wrong with setting a precedent? Does this mean that they will never impose a fine and never disqualify the other team even though the rules list them as options?

The second reason seems to be that there was just one score between the teams at the time the substitution was made. Now this is undoubtedly a fact but it ignores the fact that the substitute played no role whatsoever in the game in the 30 seconds or so that he was on the field - it's not as if he made a last ditch block on an Armagh player 10 yards from goal. Nonsense.

I suspect that this "enquiry" came from Armagh. The idea that the GAA would want another "can't count" controversy after the hurling match wouldn't seem to make sense. If it's the case that this is Armagh's approach, neither their players nor their supporters can have much to be proud of.

[Unison]

I suppose, you have to hand it to Armagh and McGeeney. They want to win by hook or by crook, we are just happy to be taking part. if the roles had been reversed we wouldn't have had the balls to seek a replay. Like little lap dogs, we just roll over for the GAA.

Pity we don't have some of the gumption Offaly supporters showed when they refused to leave the pitch in Croke Park.

Armagh will win the replay, and we'll just shrug our shoulders, and think of next year.

[Unlaoised]

A fecking farce.....

The players however will have to accept it use it as if its a normal replay and I suppose if we do win again it will act as great preperation for the clare game ...A match is better than 4/5 trainings aslong as we don't pick up any injury or suspension ...

Just hope the players get up for it and that maybe a few more folk will come along to roar us on ....

[lenny]

I suppose, you have to hand it to Armagh and McGeeney. They want to win by hook or by crook, we are just happy to be taking part. if the roles had been reversed we wouldn't have had the balls to seek a replay. Like little lap dogs, we just roll over for the GAA.

Pity we don't have some of the gumption Offaly supporters showed when they refused to leave the pitch in Croke Park.

Armagh will win the replay, and we'll just shrug our shoulders, and think of next year.

It's a complete cop out by the GAA to have a replay. For this breach of the rules Laois should have been removed from the competition and Armagh should be in the next round. It doesn't matter whether the last sub was on the pitch for 30 seconds or 30 minutes, rules are rules. Would Laois have got a replay if the last sub had played the last 15 or 20 minutes of the game and scored 2.2. I know that's hypothetical but rule has to be the same and the punishment the same. What happens next sunday if a team brings on an extra sub with 10 or 15 to go and he has a huge impact on the game turning a few points deficit into a win. Would people think that team should be allowed to go through as the other team was beaten fair and square. The simple fact is the rule has to be applied consistently and the punishment also. Somewhere in the Laois backroom team is someone whose job it is to sort out the subs. That is his only focus and he should be able to count to 7. For that reason Laois deserve 100% to be disqualified from this years championship. Having said all that the sideline official should be able to count to 7 also and shouldn't have allowed the last sub onto the pitch.

[The Boy Wonder]

Ah feck off with yourself Lenny. Why didn't Armagh have the balls to appeal rather than hide behind the CCCC ?
Laois should have called their bluff and let the CCCC choose to throw Laois out or fine them.
Please note, if Laois thrown out it would not have entitled Armagh to be re-admitted.

[lenny]

Ah feck off with yourself Lenny. Why didn't Armagh have the balls to appeal rather than hide behind the CCCC ?
Laois should have called their bluff and let the CCCC choose to throw Laois out or fine them.
Please note, if Laois thrown out it would not have entitled Armagh to be re-admitted.

You can't have a rule which only applies if the extra sub(s) has played more than a certain number of minutes or has had a major impact on the game. The rule and punishment have to be the same if the sub has been on the pitch for 30 minutes or 30 seconds. From this ruling what's to stop a team losing by 7 or 8 points bringing on 7 or 8 players at the same time to try to get back into the game with fresh legs. If they turn the game round and win at least they're guaranteed a replay based on this precedent.

[ILikeStrawberryJam]

The wonderful world of the GAA rulebook.
They are having a terrible embarrassing years with fook up after fook up.
They are run like a corporation now. No accountability. Suits on big wages etc etc ..

Bottom line is that we are a better team than Armagh.
If JOL is back and our heads are right the extra game should bring the team on furthur ..
This fiasco has brought about a lot of debate from new posters so hopefully the team gets
a good turn out on Saturday week. You could see after the final whistle it meant a lot
to the players ..

[The Boy Wonder]

There is no precedent being set here that guarantees a replay.
CCCC recommended or proposed (dependent on where you read it) a replay.
Laois could have refused to offer a replay and put the ball back in CCCC court - Laois then fined or thrown out.

The only way for Armagh to get back in was to accept Laois offer of a replay.
If Armagh had any pride or sportsmanship they would refuse the offer.

[Unison]

This farcical episode will do nothing to encourage people to go back to the matches.