Another piece of Tyrone diving which could cost Cork an All-Ireland title, a total injustice in my opinion.
Will ya keep it on the match thread. No need for multiple threads.
Quote from: mournerambler on August 23, 2009, 04:18:03 PM
Another piece of Tyrone diving which could cost Cork an All-Ireland title, a total injustice in my opinion.
more like a very stupid mistake from Bannon!! he has been a disaster from the start!!
Quote from: mournerambler on August 23, 2009, 04:18:03 PM
Another piece of Tyrone diving which could cost Cork an All-Ireland title, a total injustice in my opinion.
Hardly needs another thread though, does it?
Quote from: Maguire01 on August 23, 2009, 04:21:38 PM
Quote from: mournerambler on August 23, 2009, 04:18:03 PM
Another piece of Tyrone diving which could cost Cork an All-Ireland title, a total injustice in my opinion.
Hardly needs another thread though, does it?
No, tyrone diving is old news.
Can anyone honestly say they are in anyway surprised to see Tyrone diving and cheating???
First was a yellow the 2nd wasn't. And I didn't think Mulligan dived- just a rank bad decison.
First you could see he had slipped and wasn't even trying to tackle....Mulligan did a triple salko for heavens sake at a tiny touch...
There's no professional foul in Gaelic football, but if a man is motoring past you at speed and you take him out with your legs, then it surely has to be a yellow card, regardless of intent.
Otherwise you're just giving the thuggish side of our game a stick to hit the rest with.
As for the second one, it was harsh - but to be honest by that stage Cork had taken so many Tyrone men out off the ball, that one of them deserved a yellow card.
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 23, 2009, 05:00:52 PM
Can anyone honestly say they are in anyway surprised to see Tyrone diving and cheating???
Not a bit.
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 23, 2009, 05:00:52 PM
Can anyone honestly say they are in anyway surprised to see Tyrone diving and cheating???
Wise up
Bitterness doesn't suit you
Quote from: thewobbler on August 23, 2009, 05:27:40 PM
There's no professional foul in Gaelic football, but if a man is motoring past you at speed and you take him out with your legs, then it surely has to be a yellow card, regardless of intent.
Absolutely not, wobbler. Yellow cards should only be given (a) when the referee is CERTAIN that he's seen a foul and (b) when he has no doubt about intent. A slip, like O'Connor's that carries him into collision with the opponent is a foul, regardless of intent but in natural justice cannot be punished with a yellow card as it's clear it was a complete accident.
Quote from: DirtyDozen12 on August 23, 2009, 04:20:44 PM
There still 5 points up you WUM, this is a bullsh1t thread.
Please keep it in the Cork V Tyrone thread.
Maybe Down should be deploying similar tatics so they could have the chance to 'cheat' a team out of an AI title.
Muppet.
Fcuk off dirtydozen12.
Quote from: JMohan on August 23, 2009, 05:32:52 PM
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 23, 2009, 05:00:52 PM
Can anyone honestly say they are in anyway surprised to see Tyrone diving and cheating???
Wise up
Bitterness doesn't suit you
So you can't say that it is a surprise yourself...
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 23, 2009, 05:40:05 PM
Quote from: JMohan on August 23, 2009, 05:32:52 PM
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 23, 2009, 05:00:52 PM
Can anyone honestly say they are in anyway surprised to see Tyrone diving and cheating???
Wise up
Bitterness doesn't suit you
So you can't say that it is a surprise yourself...
He went down, but didn't dive
Quote from: JMohan on August 23, 2009, 05:42:13 PM
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 23, 2009, 05:40:05 PM
Quote from: JMohan on August 23, 2009, 05:32:52 PM
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 23, 2009, 05:00:52 PM
Can anyone honestly say they are in anyway surprised to see Tyrone diving and cheating???
Wise up
Bitterness doesn't suit you
So you can't say that it is a surprise yourself...
He went down, but didn't dive
;D ;D ;D maybe you ought to take another look at it!
QuoteAbsolutely not, wobbler. Yellow cards should only be given (a) when the referee is CERTAIN that he's seen a foul and (b) when he has no doubt about intent. A slip, like O'Connor's that carries him into collision with the opponent is a foul, regardless of intent but in natural justice cannot be punished with a yellow card as it's clear it was a complete accident.
Can't have this at all Hardy. I'd guess that most clothesline tackles are accidents; the recipient ducking at the last split second or the the offender just miscalculating a little. I've done a few accidental myself. There is no way for a referee to judge if these are accidental or not, so the only way we have to stop defenders leaving themselves in this position (and possibly leaving someone in hospital), is to make the offence a graver one than normal.
Similarly with O'Connor's tackles today - yeah he night have slipped, but for someone's body to end up in that position, they need a fair bit of aggressive intent in the first place. I can't even think of a term to describe his tackle as I've seen the style of it so rarely.
I can't have that either, wobbler. You say,"for someone's body to end up in that position, they need a fair bit of aggressive intent". Are players supposed to tiptoe into tackles? Players should go into every tackle with aggressive intent and I don't want any player on my team that doesn't. Incidental contact in a fair attempt to tackle the ball should never be a yellow card. A yellow card is a warning. What is he warning him for? Running too fast into the tackle? Mistiming? Slipping? These are all either no fault or mistakes. Why should anyone be warned for a genuine mistake? We'll have netball if players can't accidentally bump into each other.
Quote from: thewobbler on August 23, 2009, 05:49:05 PM
QuoteAbsolutely not, wobbler. Yellow cards should only be given (a) when the referee is CERTAIN that he's seen a foul and (b) when he has no doubt about intent. A slip, like O'Connor's that carries him into collision with the opponent is a foul, regardless of intent but in natural justice cannot be punished with a yellow card as it's clear it was a complete accident.
Can't have this at all Hardy. I'd guess that most clothesline tackles are accidents; the recipient ducking at the last split second or the the offender just miscalculating a little. I've done a few accidental myself. There is no way for a referee to judge if these are accidental or not, so the only way we have to stop defenders leaving themselves in this position (and possibly leaving someone in hospital), is to make the offence a graver one than normal.
Similarly with O'Connor's tackles today - yeah he night have slipped, but for someone's body to end up in that position, they need a fair bit of aggressive intent in the first place. I can't even think of a term to describe his tackle as I've seen the style of it so rarely.
His two legs went from under him and ended up in the path of the runner who fell over them. Free yes, yellow, very harsh.
The slip was only clear on TV replays (well to me anyway). At first I thought he took him out so I can understand why Bannon gave him a yellow. Don't have too much of a problem with that one. The second was the bizarre one.
Quote from: mournerambler on August 23, 2009, 05:45:42 PM
Quote from: JMohan on August 23, 2009, 05:42:13 PM
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 23, 2009, 05:40:05 PM
Quote from: JMohan on August 23, 2009, 05:32:52 PM
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 23, 2009, 05:00:52 PM
Can anyone honestly say they are in anyway surprised to see Tyrone diving and cheating???
Wise up
Bitterness doesn't suit you
So you can't say that it is a surprise yourself...
He went down, but didn't dive
;D ;D ;D maybe you ought to take another look at it!
He didn't dive.
I've no love for Tyrone but I was annoyed at how Mulligan was blamed for the sending-off.
Hardy, his man was leaving him for dead whether he slipped or not. Hence he lunged into the tackle, hence he slipped, hence he made a horrible looking tackle. The intention was to stop by any means necessary, and he got the result he wanted.
We can't have men clipping each other by whatever means necessary every time they're left fairly behind, or else we'd be inventing a new game that would end up being won and lost in court.
What about my point on clotheslines? Or will you make selective exceptions to your theory?
QuoteHis two legs went from under him and ended up in the path of the runner who fell over them.
Oh wise up. How the hell is it possible to collapse backwards unless your body is moving backwards at the time? Try it and see.
It was more roundhouse kick than innocent fall.
I wouldn't say that Mulligan dived but he certainly made the most of minimal enough contact.
I'd have more of an issue with the first yellow - he clearly slipped on the turf and then McGinley's momentum carried him into Alan O'Connor. Very harsh IMO.
Quote from: Jinxy on August 23, 2009, 05:57:19 PM
Quote from: mournerambler on August 23, 2009, 05:45:42 PM
Quote from: JMohan on August 23, 2009, 05:42:13 PM
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 23, 2009, 05:40:05 PM
Quote from: JMohan on August 23, 2009, 05:32:52 PM
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 23, 2009, 05:00:52 PM
Can anyone honestly say they are in anyway surprised to see Tyrone diving and cheating???
Wise up
Bitterness doesn't suit you
So you can't say that it is a surprise yourself...
He went down, but didn't dive
;D ;D ;D maybe you ought to take another look at it!
He didn't dive.
I've no love for Tyrone but I was annoyed at how Mulligan was blamed for the sending-off.
Agreed. The decision was 100% Bannon's fault.
The funniest bit about the Miskella incident was Bannon turning round and seeing Brian McGuigan hitting the deck and then having to step over him to let play go on - and then having to stop it minutes later .... the man's a complete clown
Him and Kinneavy must be cousins
Quote from: muppet on August 23, 2009, 05:55:30 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on August 23, 2009, 05:49:05 PM
QuoteAbsolutely not, wobbler. Yellow cards should only be given (a) when the referee is CERTAIN that he's seen a foul and (b) when he has no doubt about intent. A slip, like O'Connor's that carries him into collision with the opponent is a foul, regardless of intent but in natural justice cannot be punished with a yellow card as it's clear it was a complete accident.
Can't have this at all Hardy. I'd guess that most clothesline tackles are accidents; the recipient ducking at the last split second or the the offender just miscalculating a little. I've done a few accidental myself. There is no way for a referee to judge if these are accidental or not, so the only way we have to stop defenders leaving themselves in this position (and possibly leaving someone in hospital), is to make the offence a graver one than normal.
Similarly with O'Connor's tackles today - yeah he night have slipped, but for someone's body to end up in that position, they need a fair bit of aggressive intent in the first place. I can't even think of a term to describe his tackle as I've seen the style of it so rarely.
His two legs went from under him and ended up in the path of the runner who fell over them. Free yes, yellow, very harsh.
Spoken with the benefit of a slow motion replay. Be fair at least. In real time it was a yellow card- the 2nd one however was laughable.
I would have - and I think 90% of referees would have - given a yellow for the first one as even though it was a mistake he flew in hard and it was somewhat dangerous
Second one was just Bannon being clueless
Quote from: thewobbler on August 23, 2009, 06:02:08 PM
QuoteHis two legs went from under him and ended up in the path of the runner who fell over them.
Oh wise up. How the hell is it possible to collapse backwards unless your body is moving backwards at the time? Try it and see.
It was more roundhouse kick than innocent fall.
Good lord.
Are you serious?
Quote from: INDIANA on August 23, 2009, 06:14:59 PM
Quote from: muppet on August 23, 2009, 05:55:30 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on August 23, 2009, 05:49:05 PM
QuoteAbsolutely not, wobbler. Yellow cards should only be given (a) when the referee is CERTAIN that he's seen a foul and (b) when he has no doubt about intent. A slip, like O'Connor's that carries him into collision with the opponent is a foul, regardless of intent but in natural justice cannot be punished with a yellow card as it's clear it was a complete accident.
Can't have this at all Hardy. I'd guess that most clothesline tackles are accidents; the recipient ducking at the last split second or the the offender just miscalculating a little. I've done a few accidental myself. There is no way for a referee to judge if these are accidental or not, so the only way we have to stop defenders leaving themselves in this position (and possibly leaving someone in hospital), is to make the offence a graver one than normal.
Similarly with O'Connor's tackles today - yeah he night have slipped, but for someone's body to end up in that position, they need a fair bit of aggressive intent in the first place. I can't even think of a term to describe his tackle as I've seen the style of it so rarely.
His two legs went from under him and ended up in the path of the runner who fell over them. Free yes, yellow, very harsh.
Spoken with the benefit of a slow motion replay. Be fair at least. In real time it was a yellow card- the 2nd one however was laughable.
I accept that.
Quote from: Jinxy on August 23, 2009, 06:18:39 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on August 23, 2009, 06:02:08 PM
QuoteHis two legs went from under him and ended up in the path of the runner who fell over them.
Oh wise up. How the hell is it possible to collapse backwards unless your body is moving backwards at the time? Try it and see.
It was more roundhouse kick than innocent fall.
Good lord.
Are you serious?
We need a biomechanics lecturer here now!
Quote from: thewobbler on August 23, 2009, 06:02:08 PM
QuoteHis two legs went from under him and ended up in the path of the runner who fell over them.
Oh wise up. How the hell is it possible to collapse backwards unless your body is moving backwards at the time? Try it and see.
It was more roundhouse kick than innocent fall.
If you are running forward and you plant your feet (e.g. for a shoulder) and they both slip from under you , you will fall on your back. that is pretty much what happened and yes I had to watch the replay numerous times to see that.
Sorry wobbler - we seem to have two different concepts of the game. I expect every player to go full-blooded into every tackle and he shouldn't have to worry about any incidental contact, however crushing or spectacular-looking if he plays the ball in the tackle. It's the tendency that you seem to be supporting that's ruining the game as a spectacle, in my opinion, encouraging diving in the process and leading to the spectacle of players contorting their bodies and holding their hands up to prevent making any contact. Not gaelic football, in my opinion.
Your clothesline question - same answer. The thing is that most clotheslines are fouls because the player has no chance of playing the ball. So in most cases, the yellow card is deserved for the clothesline. The referee must still judge intent, but given the danger with neck injuries, I see the sense in erring on the side of caution and interpreting it that the tackle attempt shouldn't have been made given that the ball wasn't there to be played.
Quote from: thewobbler on August 23, 2009, 06:02:08 PM
QuoteHis two legs went from under him and ended up in the path of the runner who fell over them.
Oh wise up. How the hell is it possible to collapse backwards unless your body is moving backwards at the time? Try it and see.
It was more roundhouse kick than innocent fall.
:o
Quote from: pintsofguinness on August 23, 2009, 06:28:53 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on August 23, 2009, 06:02:08 PM
QuoteHis two legs went from under him and ended up in the path of the runner who fell over them.
Oh wise up. How the hell is it possible to collapse backwards unless your body is moving backwards at the time? Try it and see.
It was more roundhouse kick than innocent fall.
:o
We should rename this thread 'Chuck Norris sending off'.
Quote from: Hardy on August 23, 2009, 06:27:16 PM
Sorry wobbler - we seem to have two different concepts of the game. I expect every player to go full-blooded into every tackle and he shouldn't have to worry about any incidental contact, however crushing or spectacular-looking if he plays the ball in the tackle. It's the tendency that you seem to be supporting that's ruining the game as a spectacle, in my opinion, encouraging diving in the process and leading to the spectacle of players contorting their bodies and holding their hands up to prevent making any contact. Not gaelic football, in my opinion.
Your clothesline question - same answer. The thing is that most clotheslines are fouls because the player has no chance of playing the ball. So in most cases, the yellow card is deserved for the clothesline. The referee must still judge intent, but given the danger with neck injuries, I see the sense in erring on the side of caution and interpreting it that the tackle attempt shouldn't have been made given that the ball wasn't there to be played.
I disagree in real time it looked like he led with his feet on the first incident. So the ref deserves the benefit on that incident. I'd have given a yellow personally. The other obviously not.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyEgK0UOfnk
About 1.30 in.
He went in, lost balance, but kept his momentum going to ensure he stopped the man. That's a deliberate foul, taken in the knowledge that he couldn't win the ball.
If that's not a yellow card (and a dangerous act), then you fellas must be made of steel and have stones the size of footballs.
How do you keep your momentum going when you're not on your feet? What control do you have over your momentum in that situation?
Quote from: Hardy on August 23, 2009, 06:44:19 PM
How do you keep your momentum going when you're not on your feet? What control do you have over your momentum in that situation?
How is the ref supposed to see that? Its obvious here there are a lot of people who have never refed a game.
Hardy, looked at the slowed down version. He raised his knee into the impact, to ensure McGinley got stopped. Deliberately so in my opinion.
Quote from: INDIANA on August 23, 2009, 06:46:01 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 23, 2009, 06:44:19 PM
How do you keep your momentum going when you're not on your feet? What control do you have over your momentum in that situation?
How is the ref supposed to see that? Its obvious here there are a lot of people who have never refed a game.
Am I not allowed to respond to a point? Wobbler said he kept his momentum going. I disputed whether that's possible. We weren't talking about the referee. I note and am impressed by your hint that you're an experienced referee. :)
Quote from: thewobbler on August 23, 2009, 06:47:40 PM
Hardy, looked at the slowed down version. He raised his knee into the impact, to ensure McGinley got stopped. Deliberately so in my opinion.
Which is it? He raised his knee or he kept his momentum going? :P
O'Connor stopped in an opponent in an unfair manner when he'd no chance of dispossessing him. The force of the collision could have been controlled better, but from what I can see, he chose to exercise force instead of control.
How or why he ended up in a position to do this is irrelevant. Slipping into someone is unfortunate. Slipping into someone and connecting your knee with their thigh normally takes a bit of skill.
And I think if you watch that replay a few times you might end up agreeing here.
Quote from: thewobbler on August 23, 2009, 06:56:09 PM
The force of the collision could have been controlled better, but from what I can see, he chose to exercise force instead of control.
What? ? ? How?
You are winding me up now you westmeath bollix.
O'Connor's knee was heading south throughout the slide, but it managed to jerk up just at the most opportune moment.
People have been hanged on less evidence.
Quote from: thewobbler on August 23, 2009, 06:43:07 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyEgK0UOfnk
About 1.30 in.
He went in, lost balance, but kept his momentum going to ensure he stopped the man. That's a deliberate foul, taken in the knowledge that he couldn't win the ball.
If that's not a yellow card (and a dangerous act), then you fellas must be made of steel and have stones the size of footballs.
Incredibly all 3 pundits disagree with you.
The ones on BBC NI didn't. Whether that's a recommendation or not I don't know.
QuoteThe ones on BBC NI didn't. Whether that's a recommendation or not I don't know.
No it isn't.
Quote from: thewobbler on August 23, 2009, 07:07:54 PM
The ones on BBC NI didn't. Whether that's a recommendation or not I don't know.
They have an anti-southern bias. ;)
Even though Bannon is a useless yoke of a Ref ( and loves Galway the priorite b****x) the first yeallow looked a correct enough decision in real time.
The second was a disgrace but then this man and McQuillan will soon have all physical contact banned from football.
I have to agree with what a few others said here, if i was a ref i would have given the first yellow the ref does not have the benefit of replay, but the 2nd one was a joke, and i thought Spillane was totally wrong on his rant about Mulligan diving on that play.
Canty shudda walked as well.
Quote from: thewobbler on August 23, 2009, 06:59:51 PM
You are winding me up now you westmeath bollix.
:o Who's winding who?
Surprised at the abuse Mugsy is getting here. I thought he was blameless for the second yellow.
Quote from: passedit on August 23, 2009, 08:03:22 PM
Canty shudda walked as well.
Canty knew, as did the rest of Cork, (and indeed all seasoned observers of Mr Bannon) that there wasn't a chance in hell of a second red being issued.
Canty and Miskella can't complain if they miss the final, but with the Wig that is unlikely.
Quote from: muppet on August 23, 2009, 07:03:14 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on August 23, 2009, 06:43:07 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyEgK0UOfnk
About 1.30 in.
He went in, lost balance, but kept his momentum going to ensure he stopped the man. That's a deliberate foul, taken in the knowledge that he couldn't win the ball.
If that's not a yellow card (and a dangerous act), then you fellas must be made of steel and have stones the size of footballs.
Incredibly all 3 pundits disagree with you.
Does spillane qualify as a pundit?
In fairness sam no ref would have been any different. Not since john off's performance and subsequent treatment in 1983. Cork well knew this and worked it well.
Agree with you passedit, but unfortunately both of us are talking nonsense.
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on August 23, 2009, 06:20:59 PM
As regards Cork's "tactic" of roughing up Tyrone in the second half because they knew the ref wouldn't send another man off, catch a grip lads! I wonder sometimes if some people on here have ever been involved in a football match. I have never been in a changing room where a manager has turned round and said right lads we can push the limits here as he won't send anyone more off. I would have heard that certain refs will let ypu away with more, but to suggest that it was a conscious tactic is pure nonsense.
Quote from: saffron sam2 on August 23, 2009, 08:11:40 PM
Surprised at the abuse Mugsy is getting here. I thought he was blameless for the second yellow.
Quote from: passedit on August 23, 2009, 08:03:22 PM
Canty shudda walked as well.
Canty knew, as did the rest of Cork, (and indeed all seasoned observers of Mr Bannon) that there wasn't a chance in hell of a second red being issued.
Canty and Miskella can't complain if they miss the final, but with the Wig that is unlikely.
I hope they all take their place in the final. From where I was sitting Miskella slapped Mc Guigan and given Brian's past eye trouble I don't think his reaction was designed to get Miskella sent off.
Bc no one is suggesting it went up on the white board. Any footballer worth his salt knows how far he can go. O connor's sending off gave the cork lads carte blanc and they took it,(as you or I would have)
Very harsh sending off. Bannon had a bad day - could be his last. What age is he ?
Mc Eneaney a shoe in for the final ?
Quote from: mournerambler on August 23, 2009, 04:18:03 PM
Another piece of Tyrone diving which could cost Cork an All-Ireland title, a total injustice in my opinion.
He will never be banned he is from Cork and they have some notable experts in the dark arts of the DRA and the CCC and the KGB down south.
Whilst I would say I have long thought Bannon to be the worst inter county referee in the country, whilst at the game today I had no complaints about the sending off. The first foul from where I was, looked like O'Connor was going in with the arm to pull McGinley down and then slipped whilst the second one looked like he caught Mulligan after he had played the ball which is an offence for which you would often see a booking. Havent seen the replays now I think both are probably technically yellow card offences but it was harsh.
The rumour I was hearing from a few sources last week was that this was to be Paudie Hughes year for an All Ireland final as long as there were no Ulster teams involved
Quote from: David McKeown on August 23, 2009, 11:05:19 PM
Whilst I would say I have long thought Bannon to be the worst inter county referee in the country, whilst at the game today I had no complaints about the sending off. The first foul from where I was, looked like O'Connor was going in with the arm to pull McGinley down and then slipped whilst the second one looked like he caught Mulligan after he had played the ball which is an offence for which you would often see a booking. Havent seen the replays now I think both are probably technically yellow card offences but it was harsh.
Think Bannon has excuses for the first yellow which was probably justified or at least looked very like a yellow on first viewing (which is all the ref has, as the cliche goes). The second yellow was a bad decision, a mistake. We all make them in life. While refereeing, JOhn Bannon makes more than most.
Quote from: orangeman on August 23, 2009, 10:48:54 PM
Very harsh sending off. Bannon had a bad day - could be his last. What age is he ?
Mc Eneaney a shoe in for the final ?
bannon has a bad day every day he goes out,he is the worst ref at that level, how he gets games a that level is hard to understand.
Quote from: orangeman on August 23, 2009, 10:48:54 PM
Very harsh sending off. Bannon had a bad day - could be his last. What age is he ?
Mc Eneaney a shoe in for the final ?
It happens every time he picks up a whistle
He's a running disaster
Quote from: orangeman on August 23, 2009, 09:07:05 PM
Quote from: saffron sam2 on August 23, 2009, 08:11:40 PM
Surprised at the abuse Mugsy is getting here. I thought he was blameless for the second yellow.
Quote from: passedit on August 23, 2009, 08:03:22 PM
Canty shudda walked as well.
Canty knew, as did the rest of Cork, (and indeed all seasoned observers of Mr Bannon) that there wasn't a chance in hell of a second red being issued.
Canty and Miskella can't complain if they miss the final, but with the Wig that is unlikely.
I hope they all take their place in the final. From where I was sitting Miskella slapped Mc Guigan and given Brian's past eye trouble I don't think his reaction was designed to get Miskella sent off.
Just to add some balance.. Hub slapped (possibly Murphy) in the first half also...
Quote from: orangeman on August 23, 2009, 10:48:54 PM
Very harsh sending off. Bannon had a bad day - could be his last. What age is he ?
Mc Eneaney a shoe in for the final ?
I've heard he was planning to retire from IC this year.
I dunno lads, a lot of sour grapes here.
Firstly, the referee didn't influence the result of the game - Cork were the better side on the day.
Secondly, I thought the sending off was harsh - it's not the first or last time there'll be a harsh sending-off. It changed the way the game was being played, but hardly the result. Cork were in complete control and cruising to victory; they decided to crush the life out of the game and give the impetus to Tyrone to come back if they were capable. They weren't.
Thirdly, from the outset Martin Carney decided that he was going to criticise Bannon at will. The first free against Gormley (within 15 seconds of the start) was correct, he stopped the ball on the ground with his hand. The replay showed him picking the ball correctly off the ground, and Carney was off. He went on (aided by Idiot Canning) to 'highlight' another 'mistaken' free for a pick-up (by McMahon, I think) which to me was a clear foul. Banning did have a poor enough game, but when the commentary team are going on like that, it highlights an irrelevancy.
Don't get me wrong, I don't rate Bannon highly, but he's no better and no worse than McEneaney. The Ulster teams like McEneaney because he 'understands' Ulster football; he's not particularly loved anywhere outside Ulster.
That's absolute bollox - I've not heard one ounce of sour grapes from a Tyrone person - here or anywhere.
McEneaney understands men and understands that football is a game played by people and not robots.
In other words - he'd have warned O'Connor as he'd have known it wasn't intentional and let him get on with it - that's it - nothing more.
He also lets the game run which is important and manages to keep his ego in check.
But most of all for me he just understands it's a man's game in my opinion.
Quote from: Billys Boots on August 24, 2009, 09:38:51 AM
I dunno lads, a lot of sour grapes here.
Firstly, the referee didn't influence the result of the game - Cork were the better side on the day.
Secondly, I thought the sending off was harsh - it's not the first or last time there'll be a harsh sending-off. It changed the way the game was being played, but hardly the result. Cork were in complete control and cruising to victory; they decided to crush the life out of the game and give the impetus to Tyrone to come back if they were capable. They weren't.
Thirdly, from the outset Martin Carney decided that he was going to criticise Bannon at will. The first free against Gormley (within 15 seconds of the start) was correct, he stopped the ball on the ground with his hand. The replay showed him picking the ball correctly off the ground, and Carney was off. He went on (aided by Idiot Canning) to 'highlight' another 'mistaken' free for a pick-up (by McMahon, I think) which to me was a clear foul. Banning did have a poor enough game, but when the commentary team are going on like that, it highlights an irrelevancy.
Don't get me wrong, I don't rate Bannon highly, but he's no better and no worse than McEneaney. The Ulster teams like McEneaney because he 'understands' Ulster football; he's not particularly loved anywhere outside Ulster.
Hello !!!!! Are you having a laugh ? Bannon is no better or no worse than Mc Eneaney ?
QuoteThat's absolute bollox - I've not heard one ounce of sour grapes from a Tyrone person - here or anywhere.
What, in particular, do you think is 'absolute bollox'?
Do you disagree that the referee had no effect on the final outcome? Are you outraged that not everyone worships at the McEneaney altar? Give us a clue. How is McEneaney more manly than Bannon?
And here was me thinking that women were allowed to play football too, in this progressive new Gaaworld.
o'connor slid in and took out mcginley which was a yellow card. in the second incident there was slight contact but it wasnt a yellow - it was harsh. miskella should have walked though for striking brian mcguigan. i didnt see canty incident - what did he do?
Quote from: Billys Boots on August 24, 2009, 09:59:28 AM
QuoteThat's absolute bollox - I've not heard one ounce of sour grapes from a Tyrone person - here or anywhere.
What, in particular, do you think is 'absolute bollox'?
Do you disagree that the referee had no effect on the final outcome? Are you outraged that not everyone worships at the McEneaney altar? Give us a clue. How is McEneaney more manly than Bannon?
And here was me thinking that women were allowed to play football too, in this progressive new Gaaworld.
You said it's sour grapes - not an ounce
If the referee didn't influence the game, why else would the Tyronites be highlighting this irrelevant aspect, other than it being sour grapes, or deflecting from the fact that they were outclassed?
They're probably annoyed because instead of being the team of the decade, they are now merely the bogey team of the team of the decade.
:D
Quote from: Billys Boots on August 24, 2009, 09:59:28 AM
QuoteThat's absolute bollox - I've not heard one ounce of sour grapes from a Tyrone person - here or anywhere.
What, in particular, do you think is 'absolute bollox'?
Do you disagree that the referee had no effect on the final outcome? Are you outraged that not everyone worships at the McEneaney altar? Give us a clue. How is McEneaney more manly than Bannon?
And here was me thinking that women were allowed to play football too, in this progressive new Gaaworld.
Because the lack of consistency from referees is killing the game Billy. It started out as a good game yesterday but turned into a poor enough affair by the end and the referee had a lot to do with it.
Quote from: Billys Boots on August 24, 2009, 10:06:32 AM
If the referee didn't influence the game, why else would the Tyronites be highlighting this irrelevant aspect, other than it being sour grapes, or deflecting from the fact that they were outclassed?
Eh? ??? ???
What planet are you on?
He's a bad referee and ruined a game where Tyrone were beat by a far better team - why shouldn't an imbecile like that be highlighted?
Clowns like that should be trained up and no allowed ruin games - or performances - what if Tyrone won? Do you think Cork people wouldn't have commented?
You're reading too many conspiracy books.
Passedit, players will know that they can take things a bit further if they are a man down but to suggest that they can cut into the other team withou consequence is wrong. An AI semi final is not the sort of place to take such a risky approach and particularly with a loose cannon like Bannon then you never know what he will do. We were accused of being the most physical and cynical teams over the years by many(SS2 in particular highlighted me as being one of the worst) but we never would have considered risking a player being sent off to win. We would have played a bit harder, or not depending on the ref but if one of us was on a yellow we wouldn't have been stupid enough to keep pushing the ref. Trust me there are enough bad referees to make that a fools game.
Quote from: INDIANA on August 24, 2009, 10:11:47 AM
Quote from: Billys Boots on August 24, 2009, 09:59:28 AM
QuoteThat's absolute bollox - I've not heard one ounce of sour grapes from a Tyrone person - here or anywhere.
What, in particular, do you think is 'absolute bollox'?
Do you disagree that the referee had no effect on the final outcome? Are you outraged that not everyone worships at the McEneaney altar? Give us a clue. How is McEneaney more manly than Bannon?
And here was me thinking that women were allowed to play football too, in this progressive new Gaaworld.
Because the lack of consistency from referees is killing the game Billy. It started out as a good game yesterday but turned into a poor enough affair by the end and the referee had a lot to do with it.
Exactly
When the same referee is inconsistent in the same game, that's a recipe for disaster. Billy, I know Bannon is a Larry as well, but I think you're maybe defending the indefensible yesterday. I thought he was shockingly bad. How many neck high tackles did Cork make yesterday? I remember one string of 3 or 4 in a row just after half time. I don't think he even gave a free for the first 3. Then he booked a lad for the fourth.
I am not defending Bannon. He was inconsistent yesterday, and he is consistently inconsistent. And I agree with Indiana that it is a threat to the game. I don't think Bannon (in general) makes more mistakes than (for instance, McEneaney), but he's a bit of a dose about it on the field, which gets people's backs up.
AZ mentioned it earlier in passing, but a bigger threat to the game is all the off-the-ball stuff that no referee has a chance of seeing - the games is becoming ungovernable. If there were two refs, and the linesmen had more responsibilities, I think it would potentially take a lot of the inconsistency (and more importantly, cynicism) out of the game.
QuoteThey're probably annoyed because instead of being the team of the decade, they are now merely the bogey team of the team of the decade.
And here was me thinking Cork hammered Kerry by more than 5 points ;)
Quote from: clarshack on August 24, 2009, 10:00:10 AM
o'connor slid in and took out mcginley which was a yellow card. in the second incident there was slight contact but it wasnt a yellow - it was harsh. miskella should have walked though for striking brian mcguigan. i didnt see canty incident - what did he do?
Did you see the incident? He didn't slide in, it's quite clear his legs went from under him.
If anyone argues that Bannon not giving frees to Tyrone for those three high tackles at the start of the second half did not have an impact on the game are mistaken. this was a pivotal time for both teams. For me after those decisions there was no way back. As I have said on other posts this does not take away from the fact that Cork were the better tem on the day.
Quote from: hardstation on August 23, 2009, 09:20:46 PM
It was a dig surely.
It was surely, but I'm glad he didn't walk. It was a very entertaining sequence though.
Bannon turned round just as McGuigan was falling to the ground not six yards away. You could see Bannon was frozen in indecision. He was sh*tting himself. He hadn't seen what happened but knew something had. Had Miskella struck McGuigan? Was McGuigan play acting? Did McGuigan do something to provoke Miskella? He thought it would be better just to ignore the incident (including the possible injury to McGuigan!) and play on. He didn't seek out advice from his linesmen or umpires - he didn't want to know! But then that feckin umpire just wouldn't give up - he was determined to give Bannon his interpretation from 70yds away. Bannon had the longest jog down to that umpire and he wasn't in the greatest hurry to get there. He knew what he was going to be told would mean that he would have to sanction (at least) Miskella over something he didn't see himself and that he would never be able to set foot in Cork again. It was a yellow from when he started to jog.
OK, here's the thing, I thought Bannon was dreadful yesterday, but I had some sympathy for him on this call. He didn't see the incident (through no faullt of his own) but was going to have to rely on the judgement of a feckin umpire 70yds away. These are the guys who week in week out can't get decisions on points, goals and 45s right (and I mean at inter-county level when they are trying their best). The umpire obviously didn't see McGuigan's sly dig (Bannon's worst fear) or he would have been booked as well. A yellow card was the wrong decision in law but justice was served. Do umpires at inter-county level have to be qualified referees? Are they still appointed by the match referee?
The funniest bit was the close up of the exchanges between Miskella and McGuigan after the yellow card. Miskella was giving McGuigan dogs abuse for feigning or exaggerating the injury. He was clearly the aggrieved party while McGuigan's demeanour was of a man on the back foot protesting his innocence. He even helpfully pointed out to Miskella where on the back of his head it was really quite sore :D McGuigan's face was a picture.
It looked to me like McGuigan's sly dig was designed to provoke the reaction it did and Miskella was stupid to bite. I don't know McGuigan, but would that be his form or is McMenaminitus contagious?
Not taking anything away from Cork but Bannon's display yesterday was the worst I've ever witnessed by a referee. I dread to think of what stupid decisions he'd make if the game had been in the balance in injury time.
QuoteDo umpires at inter-county level have to be qualified referees?
That one yesterday is an inter-county referee - as far as I know he has refereed an AI minor final.
QuoteNot taking anything away from Cork but Bannon's display yesterday was the worst I've ever witnessed by a referee.
Come on lads, a bit of balance in your disappointment - it could have been Gerry Kinneavy.
QuoteHe was clearly the aggrieved party while McGuigan's demeanour was of a man on the back foot protesting his innocence. He even helpfully pointed out to Miskella where on the back of his head it was really quite sore :D McGuigan's face was a picture.
Aye noticed that too, nor could he look Miskella in the eye even though miskella was shouting in to his face, said a lot for me.
two harsh bookings - never a sending off.
Quote from: Billys Boots on August 24, 2009, 10:56:45 AM
QuoteDo umpires at inter-county level have to be qualified referees?
That one yesterday is an inter-county referee - as far as I know he has refereed an AI minor final.
QuoteNot taking anything away from Cork but Bannon's display yesterday was the worst I've ever witnessed by a referee.
Come on lads, a bit of balance in your disappointment - it could have been Gerry Kinneavy.
Linesmen need to be given more powers and umpires need to be referees. We need to seperate the club and county game on this and stop worrying about the impact on a local junior d football match.
And it needs to be brought in now. Referees need help.
Quote from: lynchbhoy on August 24, 2009, 11:01:18 AM
two harsh bookings - never a sending off.
Agreed, I thought the first one was a slip, and the second one I don't even think he knew he was going to clip Mulligan. However, the speed it happened at made Mulligan fall fairly heavily, because he was off balance. I think the panel on RTE were wrong to suggest Mulligan made a meal out of it, but I'm not actually sure it was even a free.
Quote from: INDIANA on August 24, 2009, 11:04:03 AM
Quote from: Billys Boots on August 24, 2009, 10:56:45 AM
QuoteDo umpires at inter-county level have to be qualified referees?
That one yesterday is an inter-county referee - as far as I know he has refereed an AI minor final.
QuoteNot taking anything away from Cork but Bannon's display yesterday was the worst I've ever witnessed by a referee.
Come on lads, a bit of balance in your disappointment - it could have been Gerry Kinneavy.
Linesmen need to be given more powers and umpires need to be referees. We need to seperate the club and county game on this and stop worrying about the impact on a local junior d football match.
And it needs to be brought in now. Referees need help.
Agreed 100%
Quote from: OverThePostsAWide on August 24, 2009, 10:49:29 AM
Quote from: hardstation on August 23, 2009, 09:20:46 PM
It was a dig surely.
It was surely, but I'm glad he didn't walk. It was a very entertaining sequence though.
Bannon turned round just as McGuigan was falling to the ground not six yards away. You could see Bannon was frozen in indecision. He was sh*tting himself. He hadn't seen what happened but knew something had. Had Miskella struck McGuigan? Was McGuigan play acting? Did McGuigan do something to provoke Miskella? He thought it would be better just to ignore the incident (including the possible injury to McGuigan!) and play on. He didn't seek out advice from his linesmen or umpires - he didn't want to know! But then that feckin umpire just wouldn't give up - he was determined to give Bannon his interpretation from 70yds away. Bannon had the longest jog down to that umpire and he wasn't in the greatest hurry to get there. He knew what he was going to be told would mean that he would have to sanction (at least) Miskella over something he didn't see himself and that he would never be able to set foot in Cork again. It was a yellow from when he started to jog.
OK, here's the thing, I thought Bannon was dreadful yesterday, but I had some sympathy for him on this call. He didn't see the incident (through no faullt of his own) but was going to have to rely on the judgement of a feckin umpire 70yds away. These are the guys who week in week out can't get decisions on points, goals and 45s right (and I mean at inter-county level when they are trying their best). The umpire obviously didn't see McGuigan's sly dig (Bannon's worst fear) or he would have been booked as well. A yellow card was the wrong decision in law but justice was served. Do umpires at inter-county level have to be qualified referees? Are they still appointed by the match referee?
The funniest bit was the close up of the exchanges between Miskella and McGuigan after the yellow card. Miskella was giving McGuigan dogs abuse for feigning or exaggerating the injury. He was clearly the aggrieved party while McGuigan's demeanour was of a man on the back foot protesting his innocence. He even helpfully pointed out to Miskella where on the back of his head it was really quite sore :D McGuigan's face was a picture.
It looked to me like McGuigan's sly dig was designed to provoke the reaction it did and Miskella was stupid to bite. I don't know McGuigan, but would that be his form or is McMenaminitus contagious?
Exactly as it happened
I think the first yellow was merited. Lots of people are saying that it wasn't a yellow because he slipped or because it was unintentional but what difference does that make? If that was the case, players could "accidentally" slip into other players all the time knowing that they're safe from getting a yellow card. It's similar to soccer, going for a sliding tackle and at the last second the opposing player whips the ball away and you catch him. The fact that it was unintentional or that you slipped doesn't save you from a yellow card there and shouldn't either in football.
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 23, 2009, 05:00:52 PM
Can anyone honestly say they are in anyway surprised to see Tyrone diving and cheating???
Why am I not surprised to see you rubbing your hands at this. Do you honestly think it was a dive by Mugsy or as usual are you just coming on to have a poke at Tyrone? I don't seem to remember you being so forthcoming with your disgust at some of the tackles that were put in by Dublin in their last game? But that's not your style is it.
Quote from: blanketattack on August 24, 2009, 11:32:06 AM
I think the first yellow was merited. Lots of people are saying that it wasn't a yellow because he slipped or because it was unintentional but what difference does that make? If that was the case, players could "accidentally" slip into other players all the time knowing that they're safe from getting a yellow card. It's similar to soccer, going for a sliding tackle and at the last second the opposing player whips the ball away and you catch him. The fact that it was unintentional or that you slipped doesn't save you from a yellow card there and shouldn't either in football.
I think you're starting from a bad place if you're holding up soccer as an example and as something to emulate. Have you not noticed how soccer has become unwatchable because of the complete elimination of physical contact, leading to continual diving to simulate it?
You can't be sending people off in a physical contact sport for slipping or for accidental contact.
QuoteI think you're starting from a bad place if you're holding up soccer as an example and as something to emulate.
I agree entirely Hardy.
But in my opinion O'Connor did what he could to prevent McGinley's run despite slipping, and not as a result of slipping. The slip meant he had no legal way of stopping McGinley. Which is why it was a bonafide yellow card.
You said that last night. I'm amazed you still think it after sleeping on it! :P
Quote from: orangeman on August 23, 2009, 09:07:05 PM
Quote from: saffron sam2 on August 23, 2009, 08:11:40 PM
Surprised at the abuse Mugsy is getting here. I thought he was blameless for the second yellow.
Quote from: passedit on August 23, 2009, 08:03:22 PM
Canty shudda walked as well.
Canty knew, as did the rest of Cork, (and indeed all seasoned observers of Mr Bannon) that there wasn't a chance in hell of a second red being issued.
Canty and Miskella can't complain if they miss the final, but with the Wig that is unlikely.
I hope they all take their place in the final. From where I was sitting Miskella slapped Mc Guigan and given Brian's past eye trouble I don't think his reaction was designed to get Miskella sent off.
This is a fair enough point.
Quote from: AZOffaly on August 24, 2009, 11:07:22 AM
Quote from: lynchbhoy on August 24, 2009, 11:01:18 AM
two harsh bookings - never a sending off.
Agreed, I thought the first one was a slip, and the second one I don't even think he knew he was going to clip Mulligan. However, the speed it happened at made Mulligan fall fairly heavily, because he was off balance. I think the panel on RTE were wrong to suggest Mulligan made a meal out of it, but I'm not actually sure it was even a free.
Best assessment yet of the two incidents.
Quote from: thewobbler on August 24, 2009, 11:53:31 AM
QuoteI think you're starting from a bad place if you're holding up soccer as an example and as something to emulate.
I agree entirely Hardy.
But in my opinion O'Connor did what he could to prevent McGinley's run despite slipping, and not as a result of slipping. The slip meant he had no legal way of stopping McGinley. Which is why it was a bonafide yellow card.
If you accept that he slipped then you must accept that it was accidental.
QuoteIf you accept that he slipped then you must accept that it was accidental.
The slip was accidental. Kneeing McGinley in the thigh wasn't. O'Connor's leg was moving towards the ground but he pulled it back up at the most opportune moment. It's not that hard to see this surely.
I'd have done the same myself, as would anyone. And I'd have protested my innocence too, as anyone would.
I can't prove O'Connor deliberately stopped him any more than any of you folks can be sure of his innocence.
Though as I said earlier in this thread, if you don't address these incidents with a firmer punishment than normal, then you're leaving the whole "it was an accident guv'nor" thing open to abuse from the less friendly participants in our games.
Alan o connor knew exactly what he was doing in both incidents and went to take out the man and in my it is very naive to think otherwise! As a tyrone man i appreciate that tyrone have been guilty of this tactic on many occassions over the years and whilst i'm not condoning the actions, if you get away with it then fair enough - but if you get caught twice accept your punishment like a man!!
Quote from: BennyHarp on August 24, 2009, 12:17:32 PM
Alan o connor knew exactly what he was doing in both incidents and went to take out the man
Just watched it now - and I think that's rubbish
Quote from: Hardy on August 24, 2009, 11:40:21 AM
Quote from: blanketattack on August 24, 2009, 11:32:06 AM
I think the first yellow was merited. Lots of people are saying that it wasn't a yellow because he slipped or because it was unintentional but what difference does that make? If that was the case, players could "accidentally" slip into other players all the time knowing that they're safe from getting a yellow card. It's similar to soccer, going for a sliding tackle and at the last second the opposing player whips the ball away and you catch him. The fact that it was unintentional or that you slipped doesn't save you from a yellow card there and shouldn't either in football.
I think you're starting from a bad place if you're holding up soccer as an example and as something to emulate. Have you not noticed how soccer has become unwatchable because of the complete elimination of physical contact, leading to continual diving to simulate it?
You can't be sending people off in a physical contact sport for slipping or for accidental contact.
agreed.
I dont think OConnor had premeditated 'taking out' of players when he firstly lost his footing and therefore couldnt control where he was going and secondly was running towards Mulligan and the aorbourne blonde bombshell and he couldnt get out of each others way.
also I dont think there was too much 'diving'.
Mulligan and Dooher imo were held/pulled which while a tad soft, IS a foule in the rulebook. Just a lot of refs are inconsistent in whether they blow for itor not.
OK Mulligan may have not tried to stop himself from falling but its not as if it was a dive with not contact made.
Canty did go in rather hard and akwardly. Dunno if he meant to go in with knees into the back.
I htink he is a very hard and tough player, but I dont recall ever seeing him play out and out dirty before.
So I wouldnt think he completely meant to do so. He could have slipped/lost balance.
If not I wouldnt get too worked up about it. I think anyone on here that knows my thoughts on CHB play means that I like that Liam Harnan approach.
Canty is way off Harnan levels.
All this whinging about how OConnor should have goten sent off etc . This is why people complain that some are trying to turn Gaelic football into a similar sanitised boring socccer type scenario.
Its a mans game FFS. You hit and get hit. You get caught and yer off. Accidents happen. Teams win and teams lose.
Fcuk it was an enjoyable spectacle yesterday and I wouldnt change a bit of it.
Tyrone were great 2008 champions, fair play to Cork and I hope they win it.
i think it was a sending off. the first tackle was def a yellow card, this bullshit bout him slipping doesn't wash with me!! the second was reckless especially when on a yellow card. spillane and o rourke showed their true colours when syaing it was a dive, begrudging f**kers!!
What really got me about Spillane was that he had enough to bate Tyrone around with without trying to go down the diving route. Cork played Tyrone of the park in the first half and Spillane could have went on about this instead he had to try and push another negative viewpoint that Mugsy had dived when in my view there is no way it could be claimed as a dive, might not have merited a yellow but that's another argument.
He is the single one reason I have went of Kerry and the only reason why I'd hope either Meath or Cork bate Kerry to the AI.
i'm not trying to defend bannon as i thought he was dreafull, but on first look, i thought o connors first tackle on mcginley was dreadful and a def booking.On seeing the replay, he did slip a bit an made it worse than it was, but tyrone were still on the attack with me over and mcginley was cynically brought down.
yellow card was maybe a touch harsh, but not bannons worst call of the day!!
As for the mulligan one, he initially jumped up to block the ball, but when it when past him i feel he purposely left the trailing leg out to body check mulligan.those saying mulligan dived is absolute rubish.he was off balance and was defiantly caught by him.Again the booking may have been a touch harsh as it wasn't particularly dangerous or anything, but when you are already on a yellow card, you just cant make challenges like that or be anyway clumsy in the tackle or you are leaving yourself open for a second yello.
overall i felt the two challenegs wher clumsy more than anything and probly merited a yellow card & a tick with stern warning rather than a red
Quote from: lynchbhoy on August 24, 2009, 12:35:27 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 24, 2009, 11:40:21 AM
Quote from: blanketattack on August 24, 2009, 11:32:06 AM
I think the first yellow was merited. Lots of people are saying that it wasn't a yellow because he slipped or because it was unintentional but what difference does that make? If that was the case, players could "accidentally" slip into other players all the time knowing that they're safe from getting a yellow card. It's similar to soccer, going for a sliding tackle and at the last second the opposing player whips the ball away and you catch him. The fact that it was unintentional or that you slipped doesn't save you from a yellow card there and shouldn't either in football.
I think you're starting from a bad place if you're holding up soccer as an example and as something to emulate. Have you not noticed how soccer has become unwatchable because of the complete elimination of physical contact, leading to continual diving to simulate it?
You can't be sending people off in a physical contact sport for slipping or for accidental contact.
agreed.
I dont think OConnor had premeditated 'taking out' of players when he firstly lost his footing and therefore couldnt control where he was going and secondly was running towards Mulligan and the aorbourne blonde bombshell and he couldnt get out of each others way.
also I dont think there was too much 'diving'.
Mulligan and Dooher imo were held/pulled which while a tad soft, IS a foule in the rulebook. Just a lot of refs are inconsistent in whether they blow for itor not.
OK Mulligan may have not tried to stop himself from falling but its not as if it was a dive with not contact made.
Canty did go in rather hard and akwardly. Dunno if he meant to go in with knees into the back.
I htink he is a very hard and tough player, but I dont recall ever seeing him play out and out dirty before.
So I wouldnt think he completely meant to do so. He could have slipped/lost balance.
If not I wouldnt get too worked up about it. I think anyone on here that knows my thoughts on CHB play means that I like that Liam Harnan approach.
Canty is way off Harnan levels.
All this whinging about how OConnor should have goten sent off etc . This is why people complain that some are trying to turn Gaelic football into a similar sanitised boring socccer type scenario.
Its a mans game FFS. You hit and get hit. You get caught and yer off. Accidents happen. Teams win and teams lose.
Fcuk it was an enjoyable spectacle yesterday and I wouldnt change a bit of it.
Tyrone were great 2008 champions, fair play to Cork and I hope they win it.
Didn't enjoy it after the first 20 mins i have to say. Thought the 2nd half as a spectacle was poor to be honest.
Quote from: INDIANA on August 24, 2009, 12:53:06 PM
Quote from: lynchbhoy on August 24, 2009, 12:35:27 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 24, 2009, 11:40:21 AM
Quote from: blanketattack on August 24, 2009, 11:32:06 AM
I think the first yellow was merited. Lots of people are saying that it wasn't a yellow because he slipped or because it was unintentional but what difference does that make? If that was the case, players could "accidentally" slip into other players all the time knowing that they're safe from getting a yellow card. It's similar to soccer, going for a sliding tackle and at the last second the opposing player whips the ball away and you catch him. The fact that it was unintentional or that you slipped doesn't save you from a yellow card there and shouldn't either in football.
I think you're starting from a bad place if you're holding up soccer as an example and as something to emulate. Have you not noticed how soccer has become unwatchable because of the complete elimination of physical contact, leading to continual diving to simulate it?
You can't be sending people off in a physical contact sport for slipping or for accidental contact.
agreed.
I dont think OConnor had premeditated 'taking out' of players when he firstly lost his footing and therefore couldnt control where he was going and secondly was running towards Mulligan and the aorbourne blonde bombshell and he couldnt get out of each others way.
also I dont think there was too much 'diving'.
Mulligan and Dooher imo were held/pulled which while a tad soft, IS a foule in the rulebook. Just a lot of refs are inconsistent in whether they blow for itor not.
OK Mulligan may have not tried to stop himself from falling but its not as if it was a dive with not contact made.
Canty did go in rather hard and akwardly. Dunno if he meant to go in with knees into the back.
I htink he is a very hard and tough player, but I dont recall ever seeing him play out and out dirty before.
So I wouldnt think he completely meant to do so. He could have slipped/lost balance.
If not I wouldnt get too worked up about it. I think anyone on here that knows my thoughts on CHB play means that I like that Liam Harnan approach.
Canty is way off Harnan levels.
All this whinging about how OConnor should have goten sent off etc . This is why people complain that some are trying to turn Gaelic football into a similar sanitised boring socccer type scenario.
Its a mans game FFS. You hit and get hit. You get caught and yer off. Accidents happen. Teams win and teams lose.
Fcuk it was an enjoyable spectacle yesterday and I wouldnt change a bit of it.
Tyrone were great 2008 champions, fair play to Cork and I hope they win it.
Didn't enjoy it after the first 20 mins i have to say. Thought the 2nd half as a spectacle was poor to be honest.
Same as that. I thought Cork played huge football early on, but after the sending off, and particularly in the second half, they went into damage limitation mode. Understandable in a way, but very cynical, with loads of stop-start stuff.
QuoteUnderstandable in a way, but very cynical, with loads of stop-start stuff.
Exactly what Tyrone (or Kerry) would have done in the circumstances. That's the way the game has gone.
Quote from: INDIANA on August 24, 2009, 12:53:06 PM
Didn't enjoy it after the first 20 mins i have to say. Thought the 2nd half as a spectacle was poor to be honest.
know what you are saying, if it had continued then I fear tyrone would have taken a complete tanking.
After OConnor was sent off is was more even and there is a lot to be admired in the defending and team play as well as the atmosphere and crowd - as there is in a turkey shoot or all out scorefest (as in the fantastic u21 hurling match Clare v galway the day before).
I enjoyed the attacking, the defending, the running with the ball, the passing the blocking, the high fielding, the breaking ball winning and so on. The chanting of the crowd 'Rebels' countered by 'Ty-rone' gave it a great atmosphere to be sitting in. My 9 year old tyrone supporting nephew giving it loads , joining in with the Tyrone chanting crowd. Disappointed at the loss but thoroughly enjoying his day out in Croker and the big game spectacle.
Feck it Indiana - ya just cant beat it for a day out ! Even if it wasnt a 'classic' game - and they cant all be.
I got value for money !
(chicken burger was actually ok too!)
Quote from: Billys Boots on August 24, 2009, 12:56:24 PM
QuoteUnderstandable in a way, but very cynical, with loads of stop-start stuff.
Exactly what Tyrone (or Kerry) would have done in the circumstances. That's the way the game has gone.
yeah, thought Cork played very intelligently. Was mightily impressed by that. Esp up against a team as smart and as well drilled as Tyrone.
I was in the Cusack and had a good view of the first O'Coonor booking and I said at the time he slipped and Bannon should have been able to see this as well. He sprinted over to engage McGinley and when he reached him he attempted to slow up (as you have to) and lost his footing. This was clear as day if you were close to the action, as I was, however I will give Bannon the benefit of the doubt on that one. The second was an utter disgrace and though Mulligan can't be blamed in any way, because there was contact, to book O'Connor must mean Bannon has never played any sport let alone football.
On the game itself, I thought the first half was excellent, the second less so but there was much to admire in Cork's performance in that half too and I throughly enjoyed the game, great atmosphere too as both sets of fans really got into the game.
Quote from: Zulu on August 24, 2009, 01:05:20 PM
I was in the Cusack and had a good view of the first O'Coonor booking and I said at the time he slipped and Bannon should have been able to see this as well. He sprinted over to engage McGinley and when he reached him he attempted to slow up (as you have to) and lost his footing. This was clear as day if you were close to the action, as I was, however I will give Bannon the benefit of the doubt on that one. The second was an utter disgrace and though Mulligan can't be blamed in any way, because there was contact, to book O'Connor must mean Bannon has never played any sport let alone football.
On the game itself, I thought the first half was excellent, the second less so but there was much to admire in Cork's performance in that half too and I throughly enjoyed the game, great atmosphere too as both sets of fans really got into the game.
Spot on Zulu.
Quote from: DirtyDozen12 on August 24, 2009, 03:14:00 PM
The first time i saw OConnors 1st tackle on Mcginley i immediately thoughr red card, in real time it looked like a seriously bad tackle. Accident or no accident, his 1st tackle was definately a booking if not more. Definately should not have been even cautioned for the 2nd incident. He wont miss the final though, right??
shouldnt do unless cited by cccccccccccc !
Quote from: supersarsfields on August 24, 2009, 11:34:27 AM
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 23, 2009, 05:00:52 PM
Can anyone honestly say they are in anyway surprised to see Tyrone diving and cheating???
Why am I not surprised to see you rubbing your hands at this. Do you honestly think it was a dive by Mugsy or as usual are you just coming on to have a poke at Tyrone? I don't seem to remember you being so forthcoming with your disgust at some of the tackles that were put in by Dublin in their last game? But that's not your style is it.
I certainly think he made the absolute most out of the tackle to make sure the ref took action...just like Dooher dived to get the free straight afterwards....Why don't you point out one example of me defending a Dublin player diving or taking another player out or saying they should appeal decisions etc...I said Bastic was lucky not to get sent off
first one defo yellow and the second one was a bit harsh but i've seen lads getting yellow for less.
in real time the first tackle was reckless and high. he caught McGinley around the thigh. Also when he slipped he still manged to take him out thus stopping him. while there is no professional foul it was still yellow.
second one was harsh. Mugsy released the ball and O'Connor came down like Peter schmeichel missed the man and ball. so was it a dangerous challenge (you dont have to make contact) or as Mugsy went past him he definitely caught him on the knee. did Mugsy make a big deal outta it? yeah he did but referee made the decision and he went. two yellows.
It's the fact that your always the first to comment on any negative points from Tyrone yet aren't so forthcoming for any other team.
And if you believe that mulligan dived then again I think your talking crap. Definite foul, tho in fairness not a yellow card offence. And I don't believe Mugsy could have fallen any other way, but it suits your agenda to say he made the most of it.
Quotefirst one defo yellow and the second one was a bit harsh but i've seen lads getting yellow for less.
Not a chance.
Quotein real time the first tackle was reckless and high. he caught McGinley around the thigh. Also when he slipped he still manged to take him out thus stopping him. while there is no professional foul it was still yellow.
High? How could it have been high unless the intent was to tackle below the knee? He slipped and fell backwards at speed and as a result his legs went upwards, obeying the laws of physics, and therefore there was no intent. The slipping doesn't mean it wasn't a foul as McGinley was stopped illegally but it does mean a yellow shouldn't have been issued.
Quotesecond one was harsh. Mugsy released the ball and O'Connor came down like Peter schmeichel missed the man and ball. so was it a dangerous challenge (you dont have to make contact) or as Mugsy went past him he definitely caught him on the knee. did Mugsy make a big deal outta it? yeah he did but referee made the decision and he went. two yellows.
Harsh? It was a joke, minimal contact and no intent. I mean if he had blocked the ball and his momentum carried him into Mulligan would it still have been a booking?
O Connor got 2 yellows and he was running about like a bullock needing balling after he got the first yellow - He wouldnt have lasted the half anyhow and was more than likely the reason why Canty and the half back got staying on in the second half. At half time I was more concerned about the sending offs psychological effect on the refereeing of the game rather than the 5 point lead. Now I still believe both fouls were effectively yellow card offences but for them both to contribute to a sending off was a little but only a little harsh, a final warning black book would have sufficed, had he given an apology to Mulligan. If its any consolation if Pat Dalys new rules of Gaelic football had came in 5 Cork men and 2 Tyrone men would have been lined yesterday and O Connor would have been gone on the first yellow.
Quote from: rrhf on August 24, 2009, 04:30:01 PM
O Connor got 2 yellows and he was running about like a bullock needing balling after he got the first yellow -
I wasn't at the game, on tv it did look as if he was a serious case of accidental reckless endangerment.
I thought Spillane's ranting and raving about Mulligan supposed cheating for the second yellow incident were a disgrace.
Somehow it pees me off no end when the pundits single out a player and hammer him because they are on a mission from God in the pundits chair. In the last game some Mayo player got loudly slagged off in a very sly and vicious manner.
Quote from: Zulu on August 24, 2009, 04:21:02 PM
Quotefirst one defo yellow and the second one was a bit harsh but i've seen lads getting yellow for less.
Not a chance.
Quotein real time the first tackle was reckless and high. he caught McGinley around the thigh. Also when he slipped he still manged to take him out thus stopping him. while there is no professional foul it was still yellow.
High? How could it have been high unless the intent was to tackle below the knee? He slipped and fell backwards at speed and as a result his legs went upwards, obeying the laws of physics, and therefore there was no intent. The slipping doesn't mean it wasn't a foul as McGinley was stopped illegally but it does mean a yellow shouldn't have been issued.
Quotesecond one was harsh. Mugsy released the ball and O'Connor came down like Peter schmeichel missed the man and ball. so was it a dangerous challenge (you dont have to make contact) or as Mugsy went past him he definitely caught him on the knee. did Mugsy make a big deal outta it? yeah he did but referee made the decision and he went. two yellows.
Harsh? It was a joke, minimal contact and no intent. I mean if he had blocked the ball and his momentum carried him into Mulligan would it still have been a booking?
I don't agree on the first one. Its easy to be knowlegable with the benefit of slow motion. i can gurantee you anyone who says the first wasn't a yellow would have given a yellow for the first incident in real time. Some people seem to think refs are issued with X Ray specs prior to a game. Try referreing a ghame sometime lads and see how hard it is. PLaying is a doddle in comparison.
Spillane is the silliest thing I ever seen on TV. His comments this week mark him a tr**p in many peoples eyes which to me is unfortunate as he was such a top player.
He was like a few kerry boys on this board biding his time till Tyrone lost ready to go into that speel. A few weeks ago he was raving about Tyrone-'total football.' He's a total idiot and as hurt by the three defeats as his fellow county men. Get over it-you couldn't beat Tyrone... end of.
QuoteI don't agree on the first one. Its easy to be knowlegable with the benefit of slow motion. i can gurantee you anyone who says the first wasn't a yellow would have given a yellow for the first incident in real time.
I was at the game Indiana and I called it as a slip at the time so I would have expected Bannon to see it as that also. But as I said if he had a poor view or just missed the slip that's fair enough, he should have seen it but I've no real problem with him on that one as it was a tough call.
QuoteTry referreing a ghame sometime lads and see how hard it is. PLaying is a doddle in comparison.
I have reffed and it is tough but many refs get too many things wrong.
I think a good ref could have seen the first offense as a yellow.
It should be accepted that a good ref can make an honest mistake.
Generally I try to be understanding of the refs job.
I make an exception in the case of Bannon.
He is not a good ref.
He marred that game with his presence.
I think the problem is that the refs have it the wrong way around and are giving the benefit of the doubt to the perceived victim rather than to the perceived fouler. If they see a player going down they assume he has been fouled, rather than assuming the opposite unless they actually SEE the foul and are CERTAIN it was a foul. As I keep saying, it's a physical contact game and you should expect that players will be making contact and falling over at a fair rate. You mustn't assume that somebody has been fouled every time it happens.
A good example is the free Dooher got near the end line yesterday. As it happens he had his jersey pulled a few steps before the foul but the referee didn't see that (couldn't blame him for that as it was on the opposite side from the ref) and he got no free for that. But he knew he'd have a good chance of getting the free anyway just by falling, which is what he did, whereupon the ref blew the whistle. He cannot have seen a Cork player foul him or explain what the foul was, because there was none. So what was the free for? Benefit of the doubt given the wrong way, is the only explanation.
Likewise, I strongly believe referees should be instructed that yellow cards cannot be issued unless there is clear intent. It's not difficult to differentiate between an accident, an intentional hit and an intentional hit disguised as an accident. We have seen a number of unjust yellow cards issued this year for fouls that were clearly accidents. In addition to yesterday's incidents I can remember a number of clearly accidental heel clips where the player was booked when there wasn't even a doubt - there was clearly no intent to foul. The fact that players can be carded for something like that is probably the biggest encouragement that exists for the biggest evil in the game - diving. Sadly, it's typical of our administrators, referees and pundits that that's the one thing they don't seem to give a damn about.
Zulu i'm a referee at both codes have done it for past two years. i'll call it like i seen it first time sitting on the sofa yesterday. yellow card, also would have given your man a red card for punching McGuigan, this is what galls me, the umpire waved for his attention calls him down and must have said he threw a punch. red card no mistake. did Bannon not apply the rules there? i think so.
i'm from Antrim so could not care who won yesterday. in fact had a few pound on Cork at 13/8
oh Zulu refereeing kids games when the referee don't turn up isn't the same ;)
Watched the game with the uncle and the old lad (who used to referee) and we all thought the first tackle was a nailed on yellow card on first viewing. Only on slow motion replays could you see that he slipped going into the tackle. So I don't really blame Bannon too much for that one despite his dreadful performance in general.
Quoteoh Zulu refereeing kids games when the referee don't turn up isn't the same
:D :D
Quotecall it like i seen it first time sitting on the sofa yesterday. yellow card
I'd have to disagree, I've just watched on the TV there and one first viewing it did look like a yellow but at teh match I could see he clearly slipped and I thought a free was the only proper sanction.
Quote from: Hardy on August 24, 2009, 05:45:02 PM
I think the problem is that the refs have it the wrong way around and are giving the benefit of the doubt to the perceived victim rather than to the perceived fouler. If they see a player going down they assume he has been fouled, rather than assuming the opposite unless they actually SEE the foul and are CERTAIN it was a foul.
In fairness, I thought Bannon copped onto to a fair bit of the playacting, espec in the latter part of the game.
Why is this a 9 page debate. Big clumsy-looking fella goes storming into one tackle loses his balance gets the book, doesn't calm down a bit and the same happens to him a few minutes later, don't we see it every week at club games?
Sure the second one was unlucky, but he could nearly blame himself as much as blaming Bannon, when you're on a yellow you don't give the ref the chance to give you another. Mulligan was the innocent party despite the eejit Spillane's comments, hard job to keep your balance when you're in the air and are clipped by 6'5" man?
He was unlucky but he was also a bit late and ran into a ref without a pile of sense.
Quotewhen you're on a yellow you don't give the ref the chance to give you another
You should only get a yellow when you've committed a bookable offence and whatever about the first one the second one was in no way justified. Players shouldn't have to wory about picking up a yellow when they are legitimately trying to play the game.
Quote from: Zulu on August 24, 2009, 07:23:26 PM
Quotewhen you're on a yellow you don't give the ref the chance to give you another
You should only get a yellow when you've committed a bookable offence and whatever about the first one the second one was in no way justified. Players shouldn't have to wory about picking up a yellow when they are legitimately trying to play the game.
Big clumsy players should. He clipped a man who had already laid off the ball and you will often get a yellow for that, though seldom a second.
He attempted to intercept a high pass and his momentum carried him into Mulligan and they barely touched each other. If a guy has to worry about getting a yellow for that we'll soon have no game at all.
http://www.hoganstand.com/ArticleForm.aspx?ID=116858
Bannon defended
25 August 2009
National Referee's Committee chairman Michael Curley has defended John Bannon's decision to send off Cork's Alan O'Connor in last Sunday's All-Ireland semi-final against Tyrone.
The Longford official has come under fire for dismissing the big midfielder on a second yellow card in the 29th minute of Cork's 1-13 to 0-11 victory at Croke Park.
"The decision was made by John based purely on where he was standing at the time," Curley said in the Irish Examiner.
"From where he saw it, it looked like there had been an offence and that combined with the manner in which the Tyrone player (Owen Mulligan) fell to the ground.
"It was a reasonable call for John to make at the time, in real time. I have had experience of that situation myself. If you are standing at one angle you see it one way and you see it differently from another."
Meanwhile, John Miskella could find out as early as today whether he faces any further disciplinary action for an incident involving Brian McGuigan's in the 54th minute of Sunday's game.
The Ballincollig wing back escaped with only a yellow card after TV cameras clearly captured the defender striking McGuigan off-the-ball, and he faces the prospect of missing the All-Ireland final if the CCCC decides to issue him with a retrospective four-week ban.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Does anyone else feel annoyed that the Ref's chairman seems to be trying to bring Mulligan into the his explanation for a poor performance by Bannon? Whether Mulligan made the most of it or not is irrelvant IMO. It's the ref's job to make these calls and it's pathetic to try to shift blame onto a player.
The first was bookable ...second was the refs mistake.
Miskella doesnt appear to be out of the woods yet ....he shouldnt have struck out but looked more of a slap than anything else.
If there is Cork player in trouble it should be Canty ....he had 5 minutes of complete red mist and the dropped knee
(copyright F Bellew ) that he was booked for is one of the most cynical, nasty and most dangerous " tackles" in the game.
Quote from: RMDrive on August 25, 2009, 11:22:25 AM
http://www.hoganstand.com/ArticleForm.aspx?ID=116858
Bannon defended
25 August 2009
National Referee's Committee chairman Michael Curley has defended John Bannon's decision to send off Cork's Alan O'Connor in last Sunday's All-Ireland semi-final against Tyrone.
The Longford official has come under fire for dismissing the big midfielder on a second yellow card in the 29th minute of Cork's 1-13 to 0-11 victory at Croke Park.
"The decision was made by John based purely on where he was standing at the time," Curley said in the Irish Examiner.
"From where he saw it, it looked like there had been an offence and that combined with the manner in which the Tyrone player (Owen Mulligan) fell to the ground.
"It was a reasonable call for John to make at the time, in real time. I have had experience of that situation myself. If you are standing at one angle you see it one way and you see it differently from another."
Meanwhile, John Miskella could find out as early as today whether he faces any further disciplinary action for an incident involving Brian McGuigan's in the 54th minute of Sunday's game.
The Ballincollig wing back escaped with only a yellow card after TV cameras clearly captured the defender striking McGuigan off-the-ball, and he faces the prospect of missing the All-Ireland final if the CCCC decides to issue him with a retrospective four-week ban.
Does anyone else feel annoyed that the Ref's chairman seems to be trying to bring Mulligan into the his explanation for a poor performance by Bannon? Whether Mulligan made the most of it or not is irrelvant IMO. It's the ref's job to make these calls and it's pathetic to try to shift blame onto a player.
Mick Curley was on the Jimmy Magee show, RTE radio 1 at half six on Sunday evening and he refused to comment on the incident with o'Connor as he said that it was policy not to make any comment as players might be invloved in appeals etc. Fair enough answer. But now that he has had time to think about it, he now feels that it's ok to comment and to apportion the blame to Mulligan. Mick Curley should not feel that his job is to defend referees at all costs and in this case, defend the indefensible.
BTW, as a result of Bannon's very poor performance and the attention given to the poor performance by the media etc, John Miskella can unfortunately expect 4 weeks which is regretable as he will miss one of the biggest games of his life.
Quote from: orangeman on August 25, 2009, 11:37:30 AM
Quote from: RMDrive on August 25, 2009, 11:22:25 AM
http://www.hoganstand.com/ArticleForm.aspx?ID=116858
Bannon defended
25 August 2009
National Referee's Committee chairman Michael Curley has defended John Bannon's decision to send off Cork's Alan O'Connor in last Sunday's All-Ireland semi-final against Tyrone.
The Longford official has come under fire for dismissing the big midfielder on a second yellow card in the 29th minute of Cork's 1-13 to 0-11 victory at Croke Park.
"The decision was made by John based purely on where he was standing at the time," Curley said in the Irish Examiner.
"From where he saw it, it looked like there had been an offence and that combined with the manner in which the Tyrone player (Owen Mulligan) fell to the ground.
"It was a reasonable call for John to make at the time, in real time. I have had experience of that situation myself. If you are standing at one angle you see it one way and you see it differently from another."
Meanwhile, John Miskella could find out as early as today whether he faces any further disciplinary action for an incident involving Brian McGuigan's in the 54th minute of Sunday's game.
The Ballincollig wing back escaped with only a yellow card after TV cameras clearly captured the defender striking McGuigan off-the-ball, and he faces the prospect of missing the All-Ireland final if the CCCC decides to issue him with a retrospective four-week ban.
Does anyone else feel annoyed that the Ref's chairman seems to be trying to bring Mulligan into the his explanation for a poor performance by Bannon? Whether Mulligan made the most of it or not is irrelvant IMO. It's the ref's job to make these calls and it's pathetic to try to shift blame onto a player.
Mick Curley was on the Jimmy Magee show, RTE radio 1 at half six on Sunday evening and he refused to comment on the incident with o'Connor as he said that it was policy not to make any comment as players might be invloved in appeals etc. Fair enough answer. But now that he has had time to think about it, he now feels that it's ok to comment and to apportion the blame to Mulligan. Mick Curley should not feel that his job is to defend referees at all costs and in this case, defend the indefensible.
BTW, as a result of Bannon's very poor performance and the attention given to the poor performance by the media etc, John Miskella can unfortunately expect 4 weeks which is regretable as he will miss one of the biggest games of his life.
no harm, but miskella has no-one to blame but himself if he misses the final.
he struck, simple as that and if bannon had have did his job right he would have sent him off at the time and he would miss the game anyway
Quote"From where he saw it, it looked like there had been an offence and that combined with the manner in which the Tyrone player (Owen Mulligan) fell to the ground.
I don't see anything 'wrong' with that statement. You'd have to be a bit paranoid to glean offence to Mulligan from that. It seems to me a simple explanation of how a wrong decision was made: (a) looked like a trip, and (b) looked serious from the tumble.
Quote(from Mick Hurley):From where he saw it, it looked like there had been an offence and that combined with the manner in which the Tyrone player (Owen Mulligan) fell to the ground ...
And there's another example of what I've been banging on about. The head buck cat of the referees, no less, stating that it's OK for a referee to take into account the manner of a player's falling when deciding if a foul has been committed. It confirms what I've gathered from watching the carry-on of refs - lots of the time they're ASSUMING a foul has been committed based on factors other than actually SEEING a foul committed. And now the boss referee says that's grand. What hope have we got of fixing anything with this attitude?
(I don't think he's suggesting Mulligan dived - it was a heavy fall. A heavy fall does not equal a foul).
Agree Hardy, it's quite worrying that. Not so much the fact that Bannon himself made an error in assuming a foul, but the fact that the referee's chief is almost endorsing that approach. I don't think Mulligan dived in that incident at all, but it doesn't exactly send out a signal that the referees are not going to fall (excuse the pun) for the diving trick. Someone reading that might infer that if they get a small clip, incidental or not, and go down roaring, they'll get their free.
They're probably right as well.
Quote from: Billys Boots on August 25, 2009, 11:42:15 AM
Quote"From where he saw it, it looked like there had been an offence and that combined with the manner in which the Tyrone player (Owen Mulligan) fell to the ground.
I don't see anything 'wrong' with that statement. You'd have to be a bit paranoid to glean offence to Mulligan from that. It seems to me a simple explanation of how a wrong decision was made: (a) looked like a trip, and (b) looked serious from the tumble.
So an offence can be judged by how the player falls afterwards? Does that not just feed into the whole problem of people "buying" frees? The call should be made based on the ref seeing the incident and whether the player gets back on his feet and keeps going or whether he is sent sommersaulting 15 times shouldn't matter.
The "manner" of the fall can not be directly linked to the severity of the foul.
Somebody on the Jimmy Magee radio show on Sunday evening suggested that full time professional referees should be recruited, trained up and paid to try and raise the standard of referees. Paying them for a full time job they argued, would attract young, maybe former players.
Mick Curley shot this suggestion down right away.
Quote from: RMDrive on August 25, 2009, 11:52:01 AM
Quote from: Billys Boots on August 25, 2009, 11:42:15 AM
Quote"From where he saw it, it looked like there had been an offence and that combined with the manner in which the Tyrone player (Owen Mulligan) fell to the ground.
I don't see anything 'wrong' with that statement. You'd have to be a bit paranoid to glean offence to Mulligan from that. It seems to me a simple explanation of how a wrong decision was made: (a) looked like a trip, and (b) looked serious from the tumble.
So an offence can be judged by how the player falls afterwards? Does that not just feed into the whole problem of people "buying" frees? The call should be made based on the ref seeing the incident and whether the player gets back on his feet and keeps going or whether he is sent sommersaulting 15 times shouldn't matter.
The "manner" of the fall can not be directly linked to the severity of the foul.
I'm not judging anything - I'm interpreting what Curley said. He's explaining how Bannon made the mistake - he seems convinced that Bannon made the decision based on those two erroneous (in hindsight) judgement calls.
Yes Hardy, I agree with that - Bannon made a number of bad decisions early in the game resulting in probably 3 'soft' points for Tyrone in the 1st half. He seemed to become wiser later in the game, and there weren't as many of those decisions in the 2nd half, though there have been a few neutral views that Cork milked it (in relation to their tackling) in that period.
Quote from: orangeman on August 25, 2009, 11:59:36 AM
Somebody on the Jimmy Magee radio show on Sunday evening suggested that full time professional referees should be recruited, trained up and paid to try and raise the standard of referees. Paying them for a full time job they argued, would attract young, maybe former players.
Mick Curley shot this suggestion down right away.
Would only encourage the GPA lookling for pay.
Quote from: INDIANA on August 25, 2009, 12:02:17 PM
Quote from: orangeman on August 25, 2009, 11:59:36 AM
Somebody on the Jimmy Magee radio show on Sunday evening suggested that full time professional referees should be recruited, trained up and paid to try and raise the standard of referees. Paying them for a full time job they argued, would attract young, maybe former players.
Mick Curley shot this suggestion down right away.
Would only encourage the GPA lookling for pay.
Come to think of it, the caller's name was Dessie ! ;)
bcarrier, you make a fair point but if you watch the incident again you can see that he did not drop his knee as such but he clearly kicked a player as the player lay on the ground. It was indeed a nasty bit of work. A discussion was about to start about this on the sunday game but Des moved on at a quick pace.
I just hope nobody gets suspended for the all ireland final - the games over this ccccctv crap needs done away with. We dont want an all ireland final with a suspension / appeal hanging over it. Please dont create a nightmare lads.
I agree rrhf I would hate to see anyone miss an All Ireland final and I dont want anyone to miss this years final in this manner. However I would hope that video or selective evidence is either used against everyone or no one and not just used on a slective basis as dictated by some gombeen of a pundit getting paid for their opinion.
Quote from: rrhf on August 25, 2009, 01:18:15 PM
I just hope nobody gets suspended for the all ireland final - the games over this ccccctv crap needs done away with. We dont want an all ireland final with a suspension / appeal hanging over it. Please dont create a nightmare lads.
If it was Ciaran Whelan you and many others would be asking for him to be suspended.
i wont wish missing out on an allireland final on anyone either, but how do they decide when to use video evidence and when not to? they surely cant say, aw we'll let him off this time as its the allireland final coming up :-[
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on August 25, 2009, 01:30:55 PM
i wont wish missing out on an allireland final on anyone either, but how do they decide when to use video evidence and when not to? they surely cant say, aw we'll let him off this time as its the allireland final coming up :-[
Thats my point.
Indianna in answer to your question i would have no probs saying the same about Whelan, its the double standards which get to me. Either everone is tried by video or no-one. I bet though if it had been whelan or ricey there would have been plenty of calls for either to miss the final. Double standards.
Quote from: Sandino on August 25, 2009, 01:34:55 PM
Indianna in answer to your question i would have no probs saying the same about Whelan, its the double standards which get to me. Either everone is tried by video or no-one. I bet though if it had been whelan or ricey there would have been plenty of calls for either to miss the final. Double standards.
I agree completely.
I hope John Bannon doesn't end up with the AI final. Mc Enaney will get it if it'S Kerry v Cork. Would he still get it if Meath were involved given the proximity of Monaghan to Meath ?
I hope he gets it no matter who wins the semi final. However I predict that if he makes one dodgy decision some elements of the media will go to town on him, to 'prove he's no better that the others' I sure hope I'm wrong on this issue.
Quote from: INDIANA on August 25, 2009, 01:28:27 PM
Quote from: rrhf on August 25, 2009, 01:18:15 PM
I just hope nobody gets suspended for the all ireland final - the games over this ccccctv crap needs done away with. We dont want an all ireland final with a suspension / appeal hanging over it. Please dont create a nightmare lads.
If it was Ciaran Whelan you and many others would be asking for him to be suspended.
Bullshit, ye obviously havent been following my posts re whelan. A long time suporter of he is me.
Quote from: orangeman on August 25, 2009, 02:17:09 PM
I hope John Bannon doesn't end up with the AI final. Mc Enaney will get it if it'S Kerry v Cork. Would he still get it if Meath were involved given the proximity of Monaghan to Meath ?
He got it in 1996. Proximity wasn't an issue then.
Quote from: rrhf on August 25, 2009, 03:37:16 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on August 25, 2009, 01:28:27 PM
Quote from: rrhf on August 25, 2009, 01:18:15 PM
I just hope nobody gets suspended for the all ireland final - the games over this ccccctv crap needs done away with. We dont want an all ireland final with a suspension / appeal hanging over it. Please dont create a nightmare lads.
If it was Ciaran Whelan you and many others would be asking for him to be suspended.
Bullshit, ye obviously havent been following my posts re whelan. A long time suporter of he is me.
Must have missed that one ;D. Just saying that can we suspend the rules of the game for finals?
People here seem to have decided that Miskella definitely punched McGuigan.
I think there is at least reasonable doubt looking at the only video angle available (if there is another please post a link).
My money is on Miskella playing the final.
Quote from: muppet on August 25, 2009, 05:59:54 PM
People here seem to have decided that Miskella definitely punched McGuigan.
I think there is at least reasonable doubt looking at the only video angle available (if there is another please post a link).
My money is on Miskella playing the final.
The Indo believes so as well :
By Colm Keys
Tuesday August 25 2009
John Bannon's last act as an inter-county referee could be to reflect on whether he should have sent off John Miskella in Sunday's All-Ireland semi-final against Tyrone.
The Cork half-back appeared to strike out at Tyrone substitute, Brian McGuigan, off the ball during the second half. On the advice of an umpire, Bannon then yellow-carded the Cork man.
However, the CCCC believe Miskella may have a stronger case to answer and are due to contact Bannon to offer him a chance to review the incident and express whether or not he was satisfied with the sanction.
Bannon is expected to call time on his inter-county refereeing career at the end of this season, but is holding out hope of playing a part in the All-Ireland final. He refereed the All-Ireland final between Armagh and Kerry in 2002.
Miskella's case has similarities to Noel O'Leary in '07 when he was yellow-carded for striking out at Meath's Graham Geraghty.
The match referee, Brian Crowe, was contacted and asked to review the evidence but declined to make changes and, as a consequence, O'Leary started the All-Ireland final against Kerry.
The responsibility now rests with Bannon but, given that he has signalled his intention to retire, he may not want to go out depriving Miskella of a chance to play in an All-Ireland final.
Bannon's performance on Sunday, particularly his sending off of Cork's Alan O'Connor, has come in for criticism.
But he has been strongly defended by the chairman of the referees committee, Mick Curley, who says he had a split second decision to make and made it accordingly.
"He did what he thought was right at the time. He did have the benefit of time or a number of different angles to look at it. He saw contact and a Tyrone player falling. Maybe in hindsight he wouldn't send him off again, but that is the conundrum referees face," said Curley.
In his programme notes to Sunday's game, Curley wrote of the impact that mistakes have on match officials.
"Has anyone ever asked what the officials themselves feel about the mistake they have made?" he asked.
Curley pointed out, however, that this was not a call for referees to be allowed to explain their decisions in post-match referees.
"Personally, it is not something I would be afraid of but I think it is a long way down the road for the GAA and is a decision that would have to be taken at the top level," he said.
Meanwhile, Gearoid O Conamha will take charge of the second semi-final between Meath and Kerry on Sunday at Croke Park.
- Colm Keys
Quote from: muppet on August 25, 2009, 05:59:54 PM
People here seem to have decided that Miskella definitely punched McGuigan.
I think there is at least reasonable doubt looking at the only video angle available (if there is another please post a link).
My money is on Miskella playing the final.
really!!! ???
i doubt very much that any video from any angle would cast any doubt that miskilla struck mcguigan
Quote from: orangeman on August 25, 2009, 07:09:23 PM
Meanwhile, Gearoid O Conamha will take charge of the second semi-final between Meath and Kerry on Sunday at Croke Park.
Magnificent, absolutely f**king magnificent. There is a satirical genius appointing referees this summer.
Quote from: saffron sam2 on August 25, 2009, 09:30:16 PM
Quote from: orangeman on August 25, 2009, 07:09:23 PM
Meanwhile, Gearoid O Conamha will take charge of the second semi-final between Meath and Kerry on Sunday at Croke Park.
Magnificent, absolutely f**king magnificent. There is a satirical genius appointing referees this summer.
There is a commitee for appointing refs. They must be a bit embarassed after Sunday and must be nervous in the run up to next Sunday's game.
I would like to be the first to add that Gearoid O'Conamha is one of the best referees in the country and we in Kerry have the utmost respect for him.
Quote from: Kerry Mike on August 25, 2009, 09:33:22 PM
I would like to be the first to add that Gearoid O'Conamha is one of the best referees in the country and we in Kerry have the utmost respect for him.
Hope you're still saying the same on Sunday evening. ;)
Quote from: orangeman on August 25, 2009, 09:32:29 PM
Quote from: saffron sam2 on August 25, 2009, 09:30:16 PM
Quote from: orangeman on August 25, 2009, 07:09:23 PM
Meanwhile, Gearoid O Conamha will take charge of the second semi-final between Meath and Kerry on Sunday at Croke Park.
Magnificent, absolutely f**king magnificent. There is a satirical genius appointing referees this summer.
There is a commitee for appointing refs. They must be a bit embarassed after Sunday and must be nervous in the run up to next Sunday's game.
Agreed, will certainly take the spotlight off Mr Bannon's performance.
Quote from: orangeman on August 23, 2009, 10:48:54 PM
Very harsh sending off. Bannon had a bad day - could be his last. What age is he ?
Mc Eneaney a shoe in for the final ?
yep bannon should be ditched and never again grace croker he ruined a classic ;D :-[
Paddy McEnaneny is safe bet for any match !!!! Yer man Gerard 'whatshemacallhim' has the potential to be another Johnny Bannon
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on August 25, 2009, 07:20:50 PM
Quote from: muppet on August 25, 2009, 05:59:54 PM
People here seem to have decided that Miskella definitely punched McGuigan.
I think there is at least reasonable doubt looking at the only video angle available (if there is another please post a link).
My money is on Miskella playing the final.
really!!! ???
i doubt very much that any video from any angle would cast any doubt that miskilla struck mcguigan
Well if McGuigan hadn't hit him with a cheap shot first it wouldn't have happened...
QuoteHe was like a few kerry boys on this board biding his time till Tyrone lost ready to go into that speel. A few weeks ago he was raving about Tyrone-'total football.' He's a total idiot and as hurt by the three defeats as his fellow county men. Get over it-you couldn't beat Tyrone... end of.
no back to back AI, no equalling Kerry this decade, and getting some payback for on all your gloating on here.........and to top it all off Everton get hammerd 6-1 by Arsenal ......its been a tough time for the not so wily old fox ;D ;D
btw where is your good buddy Tyrones own. I thought you two were a couple the way you were always on here wumming together....there hasn't been a peep out of him since before the game.
At least I came on here last year to face the music.... I would have expected the same from him for all the mouthing he has done. Clearly he hasn't the stomach for it..........he's a very quiet boy now isnt he ;D ;D
Brian Dooher must have been coaching mulligan on how to dive.... :D
Dooher is the only man I ever seen getting a puck in the ribs and go down holding his face like he'd been shot....
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 26, 2009, 03:08:52 AM
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on August 25, 2009, 07:20:50 PM
Quote from: muppet on August 25, 2009, 05:59:54 PM
People here seem to have decided that Miskella definitely punched McGuigan.
I think there is at least reasonable doubt looking at the only video angle available (if there is another please post a link).
My money is on Miskella playing the final.
really!!! ???
i doubt very much that any video from any angle would cast any doubt that miskilla struck mcguigan
Well if McGuigan hadn't hit him with a cheap shot first it wouldn't have happened...
oh rite , well thats ok then ::)
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 26, 2009, 03:08:52 AM
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on August 25, 2009, 07:20:50 PM
Quote from: muppet on August 25, 2009, 05:59:54 PM
People here seem to have decided that Miskella definitely punched McGuigan.
I think there is at least reasonable doubt looking at the only video angle available (if there is another please post a link).
My money is on Miskella playing the final.
really!!! ???
i doubt very much that any video from any angle would cast any doubt that miskilla struck mcguigan
Well if McGuigan hadn't hit him with a cheap shot first it wouldn't have happened...
There you go again. Had it been the other way about you'd be calling for McGuigan to be hung. You really feel the need to highlight anything bad against Tyrone while letting other incidents go unmentioned. And I still can't see were you posted about Bastic's tackle in the Dublin Game. To me your just full of hypocritical shite!
Miraculous recovery
(http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/images/tile/2009/0825/1224253193555_1.jpg)
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 26, 2009, 03:08:52 AM
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on August 25, 2009, 07:20:50 PM
Quote from: muppet on August 25, 2009, 05:59:54 PM
People here seem to have decided that Miskella definitely punched McGuigan.
I think there is at least reasonable doubt looking at the only video angle available (if there is another please post a link).
My money is on Miskella playing the final.
really!!! ???
i doubt very much that any video from any angle would cast any doubt that miskilla struck mcguigan
Well if McGuigan hadn't hit him with a cheap shot first it wouldn't have happened...
Makes no difference whatsoever
When is a decision expected on this?
I see that that the 2 dubs got 4 week bans following the incidents in the kerry game ..
Will this have any bearing on the Cork lads ?
From another forum :
Dublin duo handed meaningless bans
The CCCC have proposed four-week suspensions for Ciaran Whelan and Denis Bastick arising out of separate incidents in Dublin's All-Ireland football quarter-final defeat to Kerry earlier this month.
Referee Pat McEnaney was requested by the disciplinary body to review video footage of Whelan's second half clash with Kerry substitute Aidan O'Mahony and Bastick's altercation with injured Kerry full forward Kieran Donaghy, who was acting as a water-carrier.
However, the bans are meaningless as neither player will play for Dublin again until next January at the earliest, with Whelan likely to call time on his 14-year inter-county career in the meantime.
The suspensions do not affect either player's club involvement, nor does it cross over into next season, although if either player were to be suspended in 2010, the punishment would automatically double up as a consequence.
this was a case of 2 players running in opposite angles to each other in a high intensity match who simply collided and the yellow was one of the numerous mistakes by John Bannon on the day - he should not be allowed to referee such high profile games in the future. Surely Connacht can come up with a better man that him. ??? .
Quote from: sammymaguire on August 26, 2009, 10:50:04 AM
this was a case of 2 players running in opposite angles to each other in a high intensity match who simply collided and the yellow was one of the numerous mistakes by John Bannon on the day - he should not be allowed to referee such high profile games in the future. Surely Connacht can come up with a better man that him. ??? .
Since when has longford been part of Connacht?
Quote from: INDIANA on August 26, 2009, 10:50:54 AM
Quote from: sammymaguire on August 26, 2009, 10:50:04 AM
this was a case of 2 players running in opposite angles to each other in a high intensity match who simply collided and the yellow was one of the numerous mistakes by John Bannon on the day - he should not be allowed to referee such high profile games in the future. Surely Connacht can come up with a better man that him. ??? .
Since when has longford been part of Connacht?
we will have to start geography lessons on this board ;)
Was there a case of a previous Cork player missing the AI not so long ago if he had got suspended after the game?
Was it Levi?
Maybe I am imagining this ???
Quote from: Billys Boots on August 26, 2009, 09:08:29 AM
Miraculous recovery
(http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/images/tile/2009/0825/1224253193555_1.jpg)
You must have thought he hit him an awful belt if you didn't think Mc Guigan wasn't going to get up again. I know he hit him a fair auld smack but only concussion was going to keep him out of the game after it.
Bannon bottled it. It was either no card or a red card.
Just one in a long,long litany of mistakes by the referee on the day.
By the way, people calling for him never to get another game again is wrong. He made a balls of it on the day, mistakes galore. But refs sometimes have bad days. Unfortunately for Banno, he picked one of them most high profile games of the year and the biggest stage in order to show the country.
He should get another chance at reffing. But not the AI final.
Quote from: orangeman on August 26, 2009, 11:41:00 AM
You must have thought he hit him an awful belt if you didn't think Mc Guigan wasn't going to get up again. I know he hit him a fair auld smack but only concussion was going to keep him out of the game after it.
Bannon bottled it. It was either no card or a red card.
I think he was referring to his Countyman's 'miraculous' recovery in blowing for a foul at all against Cork ;)
Quote from: Billys Boots on August 26, 2009, 09:08:29 AM
Miraculous recovery
(http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/images/tile/2009/0825/1224253193555_1.jpg)
It's always a sign of guilt and relief, after only getting a yellow card ( knowing that he should have got a red one ) that the offender puts his arm round the referee and thanks him for not sending him off.
I think Miskella gave Bannon a wee squeeze as well. ;)
QuoteI think Miskella gave Bannon a wee squeeze as well.
Taking after his manager?? :P
Quote from: Billys Boots on August 26, 2009, 12:05:02 PM
QuoteI think Miskella gave Bannon a wee squeeze as well.
Taking after his manager?? :P
;)
According to Hoganstand no further action to be taken. Bannon reviewed incident and felt he correctly dealt with it at time.
Complete farce in my opinion. The evidence at hand is that he struck his opponent with a raised hand. Any day of the week in my experience thats a red card regardless of force used.
Its All-Ireland final, so lets go handy.
Bullshit. Would like to here his explanation why it is only a yellow card.
The GAA disciplinary system has been a joke this year.
I'm glad he didn't get a ban as he's a good footballer and would like to see him there for the AI final.
But as you say it makes a complete joke of the disciplinary system. If that had of been another player such as Ricey he would have had the book throw at him. Bannon is just making himself look worse. The fact that he's had a second view of the incident and still won't admit he fecked up just makes it worse. I would love to know what the yellow was for?
Quote from: bingobus on August 26, 2009, 02:16:37 PM
According to Hoganstand no further action to be taken. Bannon reviewed incident and felt he correctly dealt with it at time.
Complete farce in my opinion. The evidence at hand is that he struck his opponent with a raised hand. Any day of the week in my experience thats a red card regardless of force used.
Its All-Ireland final, so lets go handy.
Bullshit. Would like to here his explanation why it is only a yellow card.
The GAA disciplinary system has been a joke this year.
completely agree Bingo
Now official, from the Irish Times:
Miskella cleared to play in All-Ireland final
Cork defender John Miskella will be available for next month's All-Ireland football final after learning that he won't face any further action for slapping Tyrone's Brian McGuigan.
Miskella was caught by the television cameras slapping the Tyrone substitute during last Sunday's semi-final which led to a series of exchanges involving players from both sides.
The matter was dealt with at the time by referee John Bannon, who had his back turned when the actual incident took place but issued a yellow card after consulting with his umpires.
And, after reviewing the video evidence at the request of the Central Competitions Control Committee, the Longford official confirmed that he believed a yellow card was the appropriate sanction.
As such, Miskella has no further case to answer and will line out for the Rebels against the winners of Sunday's meeting between Kerry and Meath.
"The Central Competitions Control Committee requested the referee to clarify, by way of viewing video footage of the incident, if he felt the incident had been dealt with adequately on the day by issuing a yellow card to John Miskella," said the GAA in a statement released this lunchtime.
"The referee has confirmed that he considered that a yellow card was the appropriate sanction. The CCCC may not, therefore, initiate further disciplinary action in relation to this matter."
Bannon probably didn't want to create an even bigger stink upon his exit.
Quote from: GalwayBayBoy on August 26, 2009, 02:38:55 PM
Bannon probably didn't want to create an even bigger stink upon his exit.
Could it really get any bigger ? He had a chance to redeem himself a little by admitting that he had made a mistake but has now chosen to insist that he was right even when he was clearly wrong.
Not that anyone wanted to see Miskella miss the final, but Bannon has simply poured more misery on himself.
If Bannon changed his mind the Cork crowd would go nuts.
This way he can just fade away into the background.
Quote from: Jinxy on August 26, 2009, 03:12:44 PM
If Bannon changed his mind the Cork crowd would go nuts.
This way he can just fade away into the background.
Pretty much.
Quote from: Jinxy on August 26, 2009, 03:12:44 PM
If Bannon changed his mind the Cork crowd would go nuts.
This way he can just fade away into the background.
probably took note of the vitriol Gerald got. Probably a wise choice.
So punching someone in the face is just a booking offence in gaelic football these days??
Quote from: BennyHarp on August 26, 2009, 04:11:32 PM
So punching someone in the face is just a booking offence in gaelic football these days??
Only if the player is going to miss the all ireland and the ref has not got the balls to make the right call.
As he existed (Bannon), so he exits, making yet another wrong call (though I'm glad Miskella will not miss the final).
Quote from: BennyHarp on August 26, 2009, 04:11:32 PM
So punching someone in the face is just a booking offence in gaelic football these days??
sure looks like, it is also appears that attacking a referees notebook is a far more dangerous offence ;)
Have to agree this is a bit of a joke. Either video evidence is used right or not at all. It's fair enough that Bannon made a mistake in the heat of the moment (only just though), but now he's happy with the decision that he made? Clown!
I would still like to put the question to him - what was he booked for?
As many people have said, its a red or nought!
Quote from: INDIANA on August 26, 2009, 03:14:47 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on August 26, 2009, 03:12:44 PM
If Bannon changed his mind the Cork crowd would go nuts.
This way he can just fade away into the background.
probably took note of the vitriol Gerald got. Probably a wise choice.
Like it. ;) ;) :D
Quote from: INDIANA on August 26, 2009, 10:50:54 AM
Quote from: sammymaguire on August 26, 2009, 10:50:04 AM
this was a case of 2 players running in opposite angles to each other in a high intensity match who simply collided and the yellow was one of the numerous mistakes by John Bannon on the day - he should not be allowed to referee such high profile games in the future. Surely Connacht can come up with a better man that him. ??? .
Since when has longford been part of Connacht?
shame on me INDIANA, I thought he was from Leitrim. It still does not distract from the fact that he was inept on Sunday
Quote from: BennyHarp on August 26, 2009, 04:11:32 PM
So punching someone in the face is just a booking offence in gaelic football these days??
It was neither a punch nor was it in the face. ::)
Quote from: muppet on August 26, 2009, 06:31:41 PM
Quote from: BennyHarp on August 26, 2009, 04:11:32 PM
So punching someone in the face is just a booking offence in gaelic football these days??
It was neither a punch nor was it in the face. ::)
it was a sending off no matter what way you dress it up ::)
Ye all seem to be forgeting that the tyrone guy ellbowed miskella first which was clearly shown on tv. How come no one is talking about. and just blaming the cork player. And what about the Tyrone keeper how kicked out at colm o neill at the same time as this incident
Quote from: rebel true on August 26, 2009, 08:41:10 PM
Ye all seem to be forgeting that the tyrone guy ellbowed miskella first which was clearly shown on tv. How come no one is talking about. and just blaming the cork player. And what about the Tyrone keeper how kicked out at colm o neill at the same time as this incident
whataboutery is a poor defence!!
muppet, a simple question to you, was it a striking offence? yes or no answer please.
Quote from: Sandino on August 26, 2009, 09:38:14 PM
muppet, a simple question to you, was it a striking offence? yes or no answer please.
The video clip I saw was inconclusive and wouldn't stand up in any kangaroo court. The thought of a Gaa committee having to stand over shaky evidence is unfortunately the reason why he will play the Final.
I outlined earlier what it looked like to me and no I wouldn't have sent him off. I'd have booked both of them and left it at that.
Quote from: muppet on August 26, 2009, 10:28:07 PM
Quote from: Sandino on August 26, 2009, 09:38:14 PM
muppet, a simple question to you, was it a striking offence? yes or no answer please.
The video clip I saw was inconclusive and wouldn't stand up in any kangaroo court. The thought of a Gaa committee having to stand over shaky evidence is unfortunately the reason why he will play the Final.
I outlined earlier what it looked like to me and no I wouldn't have sent him off. I'd have booked both of them and left it at that.
Did you have your eyes half closed? ???
Quote from: rebel true on August 26, 2009, 08:41:10 PM
Ye all seem to be forgeting that the tyrone guy ellbowed miskella first which was clearly shown on tv. How come no one is talking about. and just blaming the cork player. And what about the Tyrone keeper how kicked out at colm o neill at the same time as this incident
I've watched this a lot of times and all I can see is Miskella striking Brian Mc Guigan with his fist.
Do you have a clip where it clearly shows Brian Mc Guigan elbowing Miskella ?? I'd like to see it.
In an case, Miskella's offence which was spotted by an umpire was a sending off offence. Simple as that.
But I'm glad for his sake and Cork's sake that he won't miss the biggest day of the year.
Quote from: hardstation on August 26, 2009, 10:42:47 PM
Nonsense. It was a punch to the back of the head (a hefty enough punch at that). Where did the 'slap' thing come from anyway? I have seen the incident a couple of times and it looked like a closed fist to me (not that that even matters).
Given the suspensions handed out in the past for incidents caught on camera, this decision is a disgrace. Missing an AI final would be awful but when you deserve to, you deserve to. Pure lack of balls from whoever made this decision.
Another point - Bannon says he is happy with his initial decision - so that's it. Is that how this 'video evidence' operation works? Well, that's a load of balls. So, the ref claims "I don't make mistakes" and that's it decided? I thought there was some board (CCCCCCCCC) that look at the incident and deal with it themselves, regardless of what the ref says. That is a stupid system.
How can anyone else be pulled up on video evidence in the future?
This was (to misquote A Tohill) "at the higher end of the scale".
Farce.
Another man above says it was to the face. Most not from anywhere near Tyrone say it was an open hand or slap. Regardless of what I think There are enough versions here alone to suggest reasonable doubt.
Quote from: hardstation on August 26, 2009, 10:50:01 PM
Where did the 'open hand' thing come from though? It certainly didn't look it to me.
It also appears that those who don't want him banned have jumped on the 'slap' wagon.
It doesn't matter a fcuk to me if he is banned or not but he does deserve to be.
Suarely a strike to the head is a strike to the head whether it be with a closed fist or a girly slap. Both are red card offences.
Quote from: GalwayBayBoy on August 26, 2009, 10:55:24 PM
Quote from: hardstation on August 26, 2009, 10:50:01 PM
Where did the 'open hand' thing come from though? It certainly didn't look it to me.
It also appears that those who don't want him banned have jumped on the 'slap' wagon.
It doesn't matter a fcuk to me if he is banned or not but he does deserve to be.
Suarely a strike to the head is a strike to the head whether it be with a closed fist or a girly slap. Both are red card offences.
Yes they are.
But I don't recall anyone being sent off for a girly slap. Amazing how all this focus is on Miskella because of the chance that he would miss the final. No mention of McGuigan's sly dig which of course came first but doesn't matter now apparently as Tyrone are out.
Two bookings was the right decision and Bannon didn't even get that right.
6.58 minutes into clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyEgK0UOfnk)
Quote from: hardstation on August 26, 2009, 11:16:40 PM
Quote from: muppet on August 26, 2009, 11:06:44 PM
Quote from: GalwayBayBoy on August 26, 2009, 10:55:24 PM
Quote from: hardstation on August 26, 2009, 10:50:01 PM
Where did the 'open hand' thing come from though? It certainly didn't look it to me.
It also appears that those who don't want him banned have jumped on the 'slap' wagon.
It doesn't matter a fcuk to me if he is banned or not but he does deserve to be.
Suarely a strike to the head is a strike to the head whether it be with a closed fist or a girly slap. Both are red card offences.
Yes they are.
But I don't recall anyone being sent off for a girly slap. Amazing how all this focus is on Miskella because of the chance that he would miss the final. No mention of McGuigan's sly dig which of course came first but doesn't matter now apparently as Tyrone are out.
Two bookings was the right decision and Bannon didn't even get that right.
Nonsense again. An elbow in the ribs cannot be compared to a dig in the head. If the CCCCCCC feel that it is, then McGuigan deserves a ban. Miskella definitely deserves a ban.
This is comical. Technically both of what you mention are sending off offenses so they are very comparable. However a bit of cop on (yes I've looked again) says neither did any damage and both players should have been cautioned for their stupidity.
The letter of the law would have seen both sent off but Gaelic games would cease to exist if they were reffed to the letter of the law.
Finally all of the above is my opinion, nothing more nothing less. There are no facts here only opinion. That clip is not conclusive of anything. You cannot see whether either actually connected for sure, we can only assume one way or the other.
Quote from: hardstation on August 26, 2009, 11:22:54 PM
Quote from: gerry on August 26, 2009, 11:18:24 PM
6.58 minutes into clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyEgK0UOfnk)
That was a proper dig. Cut the bullshit lads.
Yes but what about Miskella's?
Quote from: hardstation on August 26, 2009, 11:22:54 PM
Quote from: gerry on August 26, 2009, 11:18:24 PM
6.58 minutes into clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyEgK0UOfnk)
That was a proper dig. Cut the bullshit lads.
Definite punch to the head by Miskella. What did the umpire say to Bannon ? Bannon still reckons this is a yellow card which is worrying.
Quote from: muppet on August 26, 2009, 10:46:32 PM
Quote from: hardstation on August 26, 2009, 10:42:47 PM
Nonsense. It was a punch to the back of the head (a hefty enough punch at that). Where did the 'slap' thing come from anyway? I have seen the incident a couple of times and it looked like a closed fist to me (not that that even matters).
Given the suspensions handed out in the past for incidents caught on camera, this decision is a disgrace. Missing an AI final would be awful but when you deserve to, you deserve to. Pure lack of balls from whoever made this decision.
Another point - Bannon says he is happy with his initial decision - so that's it. Is that how this 'video evidence' operation works? Well, that's a load of balls. So, the ref claims "I don't make mistakes" and that's it decided? I thought there was some board (CCCCCCCCC) that look at the incident and deal with it themselves, regardless of what the ref says. That is a stupid system.
How can anyone else be pulled up on video evidence in the future?
This was (to misquote A Tohill) "at the higher end of the scale".
Farce.
Another man above says it was to the face. Most not from anywhere near Tyrone say it was an open hand or slap. Regardless of what I think There are enough versions here alone to suggest reasonable doubt.
Ok - when i posted about a punch to the face - i meant a punch to the head - it doesnt make a difference really does it? Muppet, you remind me of that dead parrot monty python sketch - denying something that is planly obvious! By saying there is reasonable doubt, you are either a fool or on the wind up!!
Quote from: BennyHarp on August 26, 2009, 11:28:07 PM
Quote from: muppet on August 26, 2009, 10:46:32 PM
Quote from: hardstation on August 26, 2009, 10:42:47 PM
Nonsense. It was a punch to the back of the head (a hefty enough punch at that). Where did the 'slap' thing come from anyway? I have seen the incident a couple of times and it looked like a closed fist to me (not that that even matters).
Given the suspensions handed out in the past for incidents caught on camera, this decision is a disgrace. Missing an AI final would be awful but when you deserve to, you deserve to. Pure lack of balls from whoever made this decision.
Another point - Bannon says he is happy with his initial decision - so that's it. Is that how this 'video evidence' operation works? Well, that's a load of balls. So, the ref claims "I don't make mistakes" and that's it decided? I thought there was some board (CCCCCCCCC) that look at the incident and deal with it themselves, regardless of what the ref says. That is a stupid system.
How can anyone else be pulled up on video evidence in the future?
This was (to misquote A Tohill) "at the higher end of the scale".
Farce.
Another man above says it was to the face. Most not from anywhere near Tyrone say it was an open hand or slap. Regardless of what I think There are enough versions here alone to suggest reasonable doubt.
Ok - when i posted about a punch to the face - i meant a punch to the head - it doesnt make a difference really does it? Muppet, you remind me of that dead parrot monty python sketch - denying something that is planly obvious! By saying there is reasonable doubt, you are either a fool or on the wind up!!
I'm either a fool or on the wind up?
Quote from: orangeman on August 26, 2009, 11:27:10 PM
Quote from: hardstation on August 26, 2009, 11:22:54 PM
Quote from: gerry on August 26, 2009, 11:18:24 PM
6.58 minutes into clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyEgK0UOfnk)
That was a proper dig. Cut the bullshit lads.
Definite punch to the head by Miskella. What did the umpire say to Bannon ? Bannon still reckons this is a yellow card which is worrying.
in fairness to bannon he only went by what the umpire told him, but it was a striking action. what else you expect of bannon on his last big game
Muppet. You think your one but your actually the other.
Quote from: muppet on August 26, 2009, 11:06:44 PMYes they are.
But I don't recall anyone being sent off for a girly slap.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRy7Fr5eE6o
Quote from: hardstation on August 26, 2009, 11:31:54 PM
Wise up Muppet. He hit him alright. Even if he didn't, it's an attempted strike but let's face it, he did hit him.
Can't see what McGuigan did from that footage. If it was an elbow, he deserves a ban.
OK muppet, you can hit me an elbow to the ribs but I get a free dig at your head. How does that grab you?
Are you serious? You see nothing whatsoever?
Tell you what I'll pass on the sly dig, you can slap me on the top of the head I promise my entire province won't go crying all over the net about some percieved injustice. Good night.
Quote from: Gabriel_Hurl on August 26, 2009, 11:36:47 PM
Quote from: muppet on August 26, 2009, 11:06:44 PMYes they are.
But I don't recall anyone being sent off for a girly slap.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRy7Fr5eE6o
Thanks for that, I had genuinely forgotten. I also remember the campaign on this board against the guy who fell down (I accept Orangeman's point about McGuigan's eye injury).
Quote from: gerry on August 26, 2009, 11:18:24 PM
6.58 minutes into clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyEgK0UOfnk)
Yep. Definite red card alright. OK he didn't connect with full force but he wasn't trying to tickle him. Degrees of contact isn't grounds for getting off throwing a dig to the head.
lads and lassies lets not bate about the bush here. Miskella was holding onto McGuigans jersey, McGuigan threw his elbow back into him to try and break free, at which point Mr Miskella took a dig at McGuigans head ( the only reason it landed on the back of his head, was because he saw it coming at the last moment, and tried to shift his noggin!). There is no ifs,maybes , NOTHING. This should have been a RED CARD 100%, and if missed by the ref ( who knows what that gaunch was trying to do), then the CCC should punish appropriately. I think its absolutely unbelievable that an incompetent fool like John Bannon had the final say on this. As some people have been suggesting, this is gonna come back and bite the GAA in the hole!
McGuigan should have been sent off for simulation. Tyrone players have a long history for diving and trying to get players sent off. Canavan tried it with Mike McCarthy, Jordan did it to Marsden and McGuigan and Mulligan tried it on Sunday.
Quote from: Mike Sheehy on August 27, 2009, 04:24:40 AM
McGuigan should have been sent off for simulation. Tyrone players have a long history for diving and trying to get players sent off. Canavan tried it with Mike McCarthy, Jordan did it to Marsden and McGuigan and Mulligan tried it on Sunday.
Normally I would ignore you and say you are a WUM, but saying as you are from the same county as Aidan O'Mahony you would have carte-blanche on diving & trying to get players sent off
I'd usually be slow to support an eejit like Bannon who has ruined more than one game I've seen. But leave aside the letter of the law, which is an ass anyway but becomes a cross between a mule and a jennet when passed through the crazy filtering system that is a referee's brain.
I think Bannon did the right thing in natural justice. He has the power under the law to make the call after the event, so why not use it. He could apply the letter of the law and say "I was wrong, it was strike - red card, no AIF for Miskella". And that would have been correct but morally wrong. Because the real villain of the piece would have got away with it. If McGuigan hadn't started it with a dig in the goolies (yes - we all have our own interpretations of what we saw and that's mine) and then dropped like a shot snipe for a glancing slap (what I saw) to the back of the head (what I saw) and then proceeded to lie there until his man got carded, the issue wouldn't have arisen. That was the series of reprehensible acts in that incident, not the reaction of Miskella in anger.
So fair play to Bannon. The bit he got wrong was not admitting he missed McGuigan's dig and extended simulation and citing him for both.
The GAA, well football anyway, is heading the way of soccer. McGuigan lay on the ground as if he'd been shot, I'm sure most people here would have got the odd slap / box to the back of the head, but it was hardly enough to knock him down and keep him down! I for one feel embarrassed if I have to lie down for any sorta injury. A lot of players these days seem to grab any opportunity with both hands.
Steven O'Neill lay as if he was dead in the first half of the game, until the phusio came on and miraculously brought him back round. Is it an attention seeking thing?
Quote from: Mike Sheehy on August 27, 2009, 04:24:40 AM
McGuigan should have been sent off for simulation. Tyrone players have a long history for diving and trying to get players sent off. Canavan tried it with Mike McCarthy, Jordan did it to Marsden and McGuigan and Mulligan tried it on Sunday.
'Simulation'?
TYrone have a long history of what? We do not have the monopoly on this sort of carry on - and its easy to quote instances of recent games, but it wouldnt be too difficult to delve into the past of the mighty kingdom to see that you lot are fairly god at it to, as are Dublin and Cork, and mayo, and etc...because its a Player thing not a county thing...and a referee thing...
The referee was shite in the T vC game - and I hope that no Cork player misses the Final becasue of him
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 09:06:46 AM
The GAA, well football anyway, is heading the way of soccer. McGuigan lay on the ground as if he'd been shot, I'm sure most people here would have got the odd slap / box to the back of the head, but it was hardly enough to knock him down and keep him down! I for one feel embarrassed if I have to lie down for any sorta injury. A lot of players these days seem to grab any opportunity with both hands.
What are the options?
Get hit & stand there and take it and the referee will take no action against the offender
Get hit & go down & you are complaining
Get hit & hit back and you will be lined
What do you think he should have done?
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 08:38:44 AM
I'd usually be slow to support an eejit like Bannon who has ruined more than one game I've seen. But leave aside the letter of the law, which is an ass anyway but becomes a cross between a mule and a jennet when passed through the crazy filtering system that is a referee's brain.
I think Bannon did the right thing in natural justice. He has the power under the law to make the call after the event, so why not use it. He could apply the letter of the law and say "I was wrong, it was strike - red card, no AIF for Miskella". And that would have been correct but morally wrong. Because the real villain of the piece would have got away with it. If McGuigan hadn't started it with a dig in the goolies (yes - we all have our own interpretations of what we saw and that's mine) and then dropped like a shot snipe for a glancing slap (what I saw) to the back of the head (what I saw) and then proceeded to lie there until his man got carded, the issue wouldn't have arisen. That was the series of reprehensible acts in that incident, not the reaction of Miskella in anger.
So fair play to Bannon. The bit he got wrong was not admitting he missed McGuigan's dig and extended simulation and citing him for both.
Hardy,
I know youse Meathmen have big balls but he tickled Miskella's ribs as he was getting his shirt pulled. This happens in nearly every minute of every game, well any I ever played in. If McGuigan had lay down until his man had been carded then he would likely picked up pnemonia as Bannon spent a good couple of minutes prancing from one end of the field to the other to consult his linesmen.
Bannon not asking for the incident to be reviewed is one of the only things he has got right with the game and natural justice has been done. Although I would think any suspension would have been overturned on some technicality.
"What do you think he should have done?"
Wasn't it in the Charlie Redmond Laochra Gael program that Charlie highlighted the actions of the Cork corner back (Mark Farr??)
There was a bit of a scuffle between the 2 and Charlie threw a swipe.
In came the ref with the notebook drawn only for the corner back to get up and tell the ref there was nothing in it.
It's not soccer for feck sake. You try to play the game honourably.
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 09:19:51 AM
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 09:06:46 AM
The GAA, well football anyway, is heading the way of soccer. McGuigan lay on the ground as if he'd been shot, I'm sure most people here would have got the odd slap / box to the back of the head, but it was hardly enough to knock him down and keep him down! I for one feel embarrassed if I have to lie down for any sorta injury. A lot of players these days seem to grab any opportunity with both hands.
What are the options?
Get hit & stand there and take it and the referee will take no action against the offender
Get hit & go down & you are complaining
Get hit & hit back and you will be lined
What do you think he should have done?
Be a f**king man, has nobody any pride left?
Lads I appreciate everyone is trying to be admirable & all that but this is the real world FFS ::)
People are playing the game to win & are willing to bend/break the rules to gain any advantage
If Mc Guigan got hit he has every right to go down. How do you know how hard the strike was?
While bleating that it is a mans game ETC ETC ETC what do you make of Canty putting the knees into a player? Does that make him more of a man or does that make him a player who is willing to do anything to get that AI that he so craves?
Sticking the knees in someone is not admirable. I also think that Miskella was wrong to strike, especially from behind, don't have time for that sorta thing. I'm not going on about it being a man's game or who's the toughest, but jesus at every opportunity men are lying down waiting on physios to come on and rub them for 10 seconds, they get up, do a fake hobble for a few seconds then hey presto they're grand again.
Steven O'Neill lay face down for the guts of 20 seconds in the first half of the game. I actually commented that he must have been knocked out as he wasn't moving a muscle, then lo and behold on comes the physio, waves their magic wand and don't worry folks, he's ok!!
Sickens my pish.
And don't worry its not just tyrone, but its veering towards soccer if you ask me.
I await with baited breath to see if the PC brigade here apply the same logic to their own counties when similar incidents happen. I wonder.
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 09:47:13 AM
Sticking the knees in someone is not admirable. I also think that Miskella was wrong to strike, especially from behind, don't have time for that sorta thing. I'm not going on about it being a man's game or who's the toughest, but jesus at every opportunity men are lying down waiting on physios to come on and rub them for 10 seconds, they get up, do a fake hobble for a few seconds then hey presto they're grand again.
Steven O'Neill lay face down for the guts of 20 seconds in the first half of the game. I actually commented that he must have been knocked out as he wasn't moving a muscle, then lo and behold on comes the physio, waves their magic wand and don't worry folks, he's ok!!
Sickens my pish.
And don't worry its not just tyrone, but its veering towards soccer if you ask me.
If you are talking about players lying down, then fair enough that is a different matter.
I thought you were talking about the Mc Guigan incident where he was punched in the head.
What option did he have?
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 08:38:44 AM
I'd usually be slow to support an eejit like Bannon who has ruined more than one game I've seen. But leave aside the letter of the law, which is an ass anyway but becomes a cross between a mule and a jennet when passed through the crazy filtering system that is a referee's brain.
I think Bannon did the right thing in natural justice. He has the power under the law to make the call after the event, so why not use it. He could apply the letter of the law and say "I was wrong, it was strike - red card, no AIF for Miskella". And that would have been correct but morally wrong. Because the real villain of the piece would have got away with it. If McGuigan hadn't started it with a dig in the goolies (yes - we all have our own interpretations of what we saw and that's mine) and then dropped like a shot snipe for a glancing slap (what I saw) to the back of the head (what I saw) and then proceeded to lie there until his man got carded, the issue wouldn't have arisen. That was the series of reprehensible acts in that incident, not the reaction of Miskella in anger.
So fair play to Bannon. The bit he got wrong was not admitting he missed McGuigan's dig and extended simulation and citing him for both.
There is no evidence to suggest he was hit in the balls. I've looked at it 10 times now and I can't see how you can be so certain that happened. Totally inconclusive if you ask me. If he was hit in the balls then thats a different story but it distinctly looks to me he was tapped in his chest.
Yeah sorry I sorta went away from the original topic. In my opinion he wasnt hit hard enough to be knocked down, in my opinion. He certainly, in my opinion, wasnt hit hard enough to be put down for a few minutes.
In that case, in my opinion, he was lying down to get a man sent off. You bide your time and get him when the opportunity arises, the way he went about it is the reason why I'm saying we're getting closer to soccer.
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 09:57:29 AM
Yeah sorry I sorta went away from the original topic. In my opinion he wasnt hit hard enough to be knocked down, in my opinion. He certainly, in my opinion, wasnt hit hard enough to be put down for a few minutes.
In that case, in my opinion, he was lying down to get a man sent off. You bide your time and get him when the opportunity arises, the way he went about it is the reason why I'm saying we're getting closer to soccer.
I don't agree -if you strike you have to go. Thats a strike for me. I remain to be convinced that something of any magnitude happened beforehand. If it did then thats different. But I can't see how any poster here can see something the rest of us can't from that camera angle.
Quote from: INDIANA on August 27, 2009, 10:01:27 AM
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 09:57:29 AM
Yeah sorry I sorta went away from the original topic. In my opinion he wasnt hit hard enough to be knocked down, in my opinion. He certainly, in my opinion, wasnt hit hard enough to be put down for a few minutes.
In that case, in my opinion, he was lying down to get a man sent off. You bide your time and get him when the opportunity arises, the way he went about it is the reason why I'm saying we're getting closer to soccer.
I don't agree -if you strike you have to go. Thats a strike for me. I remain to be convinced that something of any magnitude happened beforehand. If it did then thats different. But I can't see how any poster here can see something the rest of us can't from that camera angle.
No no, I completely completely agree that he should have gone! I still cant understand what he was booked for, I just am getting fed up with people lying down at every opportunity. Maybe I'm just not sly enough.
If a hand is raised the man should go, that I can agree on.
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 09:57:29 AM
In that case, in my opinion, he was lying down to get a man sent off. You bide your time and get him when the opportunity arises, the way he went about it is the reason why I'm saying we're getting closer to soccer.
FFS, you would have carnage on a field if that was the case
That is the reason there is a referee
The amount of broken jaws at club level as well is on the increase- largely due to similar incidents. The repurcussions of non-application of the rules are most felt at club level rather than county level.
I can see why Bannon didn't upgrade the incident though. He'd never be able to set foot in Cork again.
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 09:47:13 AM
Sticking the knees in someone is not admirable. I also think that Miskella was wrong to strike, especially from behind, don't have time for that sorta thing. I'm not going on about it being a man's game or who's the toughest, but jesus at every opportunity men are lying down waiting on physios to come on and rub them for 10 seconds, they get up, do a fake hobble for a few seconds then hey presto they're grand again.
Steven O'Neill lay face down for the guts of 20 seconds in the first half of the game. I actually commented that he must have been knocked out as he wasn't moving a muscle, then lo and behold on comes the physio, waves their magic wand and don't worry folks, he's ok!!
Sickens my pish.
And don't worry its not just tyrone, but its veering towards soccer if you ask me.
Definitely.
It definitely is veering towards soccer which is a disaster
Players diving does my head in & is terrible to watch but Miskella punched a player in the head & deserved to go (although I am delighted that a player wont miss an AI final)
There is a massive difference between diving when punched in the head & diving on other occasions when there has been very little in it
This is the crux of the peoblem, not castigating players like Mc Guigan
I wouldn't be castigating him if he'd acted like a man instead of aping some soccer clown. A glancing half-swing with an open hand in anger is not to be condoned, but is more easily understood and forgiven (by me, anyway) than soccer-inspired cheating that is much more of a danger to the game and deserves more attention from the authorities than it's getting.
In my opinion, of course.
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 10:31:04 AM
A glancing half-swing with an open hand
You are making it sound like he was tapping him on the side of the head hardy ::)
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 10:22:24 AM
It definitely is veering towards soccer which is a disaster
Players diving does my head in & is terrible to watch but Miskella punched a player in the head & deserved to go (although I am delighted that a player wont miss an AI final)
There is a massive difference between diving when punched in the head & diving on other occasions when there has been very little in it
This is the crux of the peoblem, not castigating players like Mc Guigan
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 10:22:24 AM
It definitely is veering towards soccer which is a disaster
Players diving does my head in & is terrible to watch but Miskella punched a player in the head & deserved to go (although I am delighted that a player wont miss an AI final)
There is a massive difference between diving when punched in the head & diving on other occasions when there has been very little in it
This is the crux of the peoblem, not castigating players like Mc Guigan
Well that is true. And although I didnt get the box on the head, it takes an awful thump to put someone down, for that length of time anyway!
Sorry I'm sounding like I am picking on McGuigan here.
Its a general thing I have noticed. Even at clubs, men lying down waiting on physios. A lot of attention seeking going on.
In the reality of things, I think there would be one, maybe two times in a match where a physio is actually needed, yet they seem to be on the pitch a dozen times a game!
Lads I have said this before Canty did not just drop his knees. It was a clear kick if you watch it on video it was a kick.
Quote from: Sandino on August 27, 2009, 01:52:08 PM
Lads I have said this before Canty did not just drop his knees. It was a clear kick if you watch it on video it was a kick.
Do you have a link?
For the miskella incident it looked like a slap from what i seen but whatever it was, is it not in the rules that striking is a straight red no matter what the force is.
Hardy you're such a real man. I'll bet that if an elephant hit you he would pay for it. Such a clown ::)
Quote from: No way ref on August 27, 2009, 02:23:40 PM
Hardy you're such a real man. I'll bet that if an elephant hit you he would pay for it. Such a clown ::)
Devastating argument there. Have you anything sensible to say?
attempted striking is also a red card offence contact does not have to have been made. I know cuz it happened to me.
Alan O Conner jumped at Mulligan with knee and forearm late !!! Should have been straight red.
Quote from: INDIANA on August 27, 2009, 10:01:27 AM
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 09:57:29 AM
Yeah sorry I sorta went away from the original topic. In my opinion he wasnt hit hard enough to be knocked down, in my opinion. He certainly, in my opinion, wasnt hit hard enough to be put down for a few minutes.
In that case, in my opinion, he was lying down to get a man sent off. You bide your time and get him when the opportunity arises, the way he went about it is the reason why I'm saying we're getting closer to soccer.
I don't agree -if you strike you have to go. Thats a strike for me. I remain to be convinced that something of any magnitude happened beforehand. If it did then thats different. But I can't see how any poster here can see something the rest of us can't from that camera angle.
Which is it? A strike or the magnitude? The rules don't make any such distinction (other than in the degree of the penalty). I saw a deliberate sly dig from McGuigan off-the ball, what did you see?
Miskella took the bite and retaliated. McGuigan made the most of it as was evident by the closeup of the "discussion" between himself and Miskella after he had "recovered". McGuigan couldn't even look Miskella in the eye while he was pointing out the spot on his head that was weally, weally sore :D I laughed out loud when I saw it.
Which only goes to show that McGuigan is not up for "the dark arts" and should catch himself on before he gets seriously hurt and Miskella is a liability if he can be so easily provoked into doing something so stupid that was always going to caught by the cameras if not the officials.
Justice was served even if the law was (again) seen to be an ass in the process.
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 03:06:26 PM
Quote from: No way ref on August 27, 2009, 02:23:40 PM
Hardy you're such a real man. I'll bet that if an elephant hit you he would pay for it. Such a clown ::)
Devastating argument there. Have you anything sensible to say?
Who is arguing ???
Quote from: ha ha derry on August 27, 2009, 03:23:58 PM
attempted striking is also a red card offence contact does not have to have been made. I know cuz it happened to me.
Alan O Conner jumped at Mulligan with knee and forearm late !!! Should have been straight red.
Catch yerself on. O'Connor was going for a block. The amount of contact he made with Mulligan is debatable but his swan dive was extravagant to say the least. Whether that was to simulate or to protect himself in a speedy fall, I don't know. But he does have history...
Glad to see Gormley's own swan dive being ignored. He should have been booked for it. That would help cut out some of the sh*te that creeping into the game. And I'm not laying it all at Tyrone's door either...
Quote from: No way ref on August 27, 2009, 03:34:37 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 03:06:26 PM
Quote from: No way ref on August 27, 2009, 02:23:40 PM
Hardy you're such a real man. I'll bet that if an elephant hit you he would pay for it. Such a clown ::)
Devastating argument there. Have you anything sensible to say?
Who is arguing ???
Look - do you have a point?
Quote from: OverThePostsAWide on August 27, 2009, 03:28:24 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on August 27, 2009, 10:01:27 AM
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 09:57:29 AM
Yeah sorry I sorta went away from the original topic. In my opinion he wasnt hit hard enough to be knocked down, in my opinion. He certainly, in my opinion, wasnt hit hard enough to be put down for a few minutes.
In that case, in my opinion, he was lying down to get a man sent off. You bide your time and get him when the opportunity arises, the way he went about it is the reason why I'm saying we're getting closer to soccer.
I don't agree -if you strike you have to go. Thats a strike for me. I remain to be convinced that something of any magnitude happened beforehand. If it did then thats different. But I can't see how any poster here can see something the rest of us can't from that camera angle.
Which is it? A strike or the magnitude? The rules don't make any such distinction (other than in the degree of the penalty). I saw a deliberate sly dig from McGuigan off-the ball, what did you see?
Miskella took the bite and retaliated. McGuigan made the most of it as was evident by the closeup of the "discussion" between himself and Miskella after he had "recovered". McGuigan couldn't even look Miskella in the eye while he was pointing out the spot on his head that was weally, weally sore :D I laughed out loud when I saw it.
Which only goes to show that McGuigan is not up for "the dark arts" and should catch himself on before he gets seriously hurt and Miskella is a liability if he can be so easily provoked into doing something so stupid that was always going to caught by the cameras if not the officials.
Justice was served even if the law was (again) seen to be an ass in the process.
Nope I don't agree- I saw nothing more than a poke. Some people here alleged he was punched in the balls. If he was punched in the balls he wouldn't have been in any position to hit Mc Guigan because he would have been on the deck.
With all due respect if everybody was to start punching people based on that level of contact -matches would finish up 7 a side. In My opinion. I can't see the sort of contact based on that where It would give Miskella a serious reason to hit Mc Guigan. Unless somebody else has more evidence to add.
I'd also like to add I wouldn't have any particular liking for Mc Guigan . But i wouldn't like to see a player missing a Final. As I said earlier the repurcussions of these incidents are more seen at club level , where the rise of broken jaws is increasing at an alarming rate.
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 03:47:20 PM
Quote from: No way ref on August 27, 2009, 03:34:37 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 03:06:26 PM
Quote from: No way ref on August 27, 2009, 02:23:40 PM
Hardy you're such a real man. I'll bet that if an elephant hit you he would pay for it. Such a clown ::)
Devastating argument there. Have you anything sensible to say?
Who is arguing ???
Look - do you have a point?
i certainly do. You make Brian Mc Guigan the villian of the piece because you
guess that he hit Miskella a sly dig for no other reason but to provoke a reaction. I
guess that although some altercation occurred between Mc Guigan and Miskella (was Miskella holding Mc Guigans jersey), Mc Guigan was struck on the head and he went down. For you to say that this makes him a soccer player is typical Meath bravado where no one goes down unless they are dead
Thanks. Why couldn't you say that in the first place?
While you're guessing, what's your guess as to why McGuigan simulated a serious injury?
By the way, refusing to behave like a cheating girl is not bravado. It's just the honest way to play the game. It's not a mode of behaviour exclusive to Meath players.
Please let school start again.
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 04:08:14 PM
Thanks. Why couldn't you say that in the first place?
While you're guessing, what's your guess as to why McGuigan simulated a serious injury?
By the way, refusing to behave like a cheating girl is not bravado. It's just the honest way to play the game. It's not a mode of behaviour exclusive to Meath players.
Such a stupid question. He was punched in the head (yes that's actually what happened) and he went down. What the fcuk do you mean serious injury?
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 04:08:14 PM
By the way, refusing to behave like a cheating girl is not bravado. It's just the honest way to play the game.
Jesus, this is getting tough.........
What would you like someone to do that has been punched in the head?
Being punched in the head and knocked out is serious injury. Being punched on the head and falling in a pile for a suitable amount of time ;) means he had alterior motives. There is no way in hell that punch was hard enough to knock a man to the ground and keep him there for several minutes.
This is going on too often in our sport.
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 04:15:40 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 04:08:14 PM
By the way, refusing to behave like a cheating girl is not bravado. It's just the honest way to play the game.
Jesus, this is getting tough.........
What would you like someone to do that has been punched in the head?
so every time you get punched in the head you go down? If you were picked on in the street would you lie down like a big sissy and wait for help? No you wouldnt, I am no more a man than McGuigan for saying I wouldnt, and its not him I am singling out, but my point is:
TOO MANY PEOPLE ENJOY THE ATTENTION OF A PHYSIO HAVING TO RUSH TO THEIR ATTENTION AND FOR WHAT?!
WHAT THE F**K DID STEPHEN O'NEILL NEED A PHYSIO FOR DOWN AT THE END LINE IN THE FIRST HALF? NOTHING, THATS WHAT.
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 04:18:53 PM
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 04:15:40 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 04:08:14 PM
By the way, refusing to behave like a cheating girl is not bravado. It's just the honest way to play the game.
Jesus, this is getting tough.........
What would you like someone to do that has been punched in the head?
so every time you get punched in the head you go down? If you were picked on in the street would you lie down like a big sissy and wait for help? No you wouldnt, I am no more a man than McGuigan for saying I wouldnt, and its not him I am singling out, but my point is:
TOO MANY PEOPLE ENJOY THE ATTENTION OF A PHYSIO HAVING TO RUSH TO THEIR ATTENTION AND FOR WHAT?!
WHAT THE F**K DID STEPHEN O'NEILL NEED A PHYSIO FOR DOWN AT THE END LINE IN THE FIRST HALF? NOTHING, THATS WHAT.
Deep breaths..........................
Who is talking about Stephen O Neill??
Most people agree with you that the actions of some players is making the GAA more & more like soccer which no-one wants but that isnt the point being made
We are talking about Brian Mc Guigan getting punched in the head here.
No we're not. We're talking about a girlie slap. He wasn't hurt. He was putting it on. He was trying to get his opponent into trouble. He was aping soccer behaviour. He was not behaving in a manly fashion. He was exhibiting the kind of behaviour that has become too prevalent in the game and should be eradicated.
In my opinion.
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 04:27:34 PM
No we're not. We're talking about a girlie slap. He wasn't hurt. He was putting it on. He was trying to get his opponent into trouble. He was aping soccer behaviour. He was not behaving in a manly fashion. He was exhibiting the kind of behaviour that has become too prevalent in the game and should be eradicated.
In my opinion.
Herein lies the problem. When John Miskella threw the punch he was getting himself into trouble. Mc Guigans actions after the event shouldn't matter. I would agree with you if Mc Guigan hadnt been hit and tried to get Miskella sent off but he was hit off the ball.
Oops, sorry FB, away with the fairies again!
Re: McGuigan:
He was punched on the head - yes.
Was the punch hard enough to knock him down? - I honestly dont think so. To me, that is his first reaction regardless of power behind the box.
Was it hard enough to keep him down for several minutes? - certainly not! He got up after a few mins rubbing his head. I wonder was he checked for concussion after the match ::)
If I was punched on the back of the head would I fall down straight away? No, I have a bit of pride in myself and to the best of my ability would remain on my feet.
TBH, you dont know how hard he was hit
If you are punched in the head & dont react do you think the fella that done it is going to get away with it?
Quote from: No way ref on August 27, 2009, 04:35:42 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 04:27:34 PM
No we're not. We're talking about a girlie slap. He wasn't hurt. He was putting it on. He was trying to get his opponent into trouble. He was aping soccer behaviour. He was not behaving in a manly fashion. He was exhibiting the kind of behaviour that has become too prevalent in the game and should be eradicated.
In my opinion.
Herein lies the problem. When John Miskella threw the punch he was getting himself into trouble. Mc Guigans actions after the event shouldn't matter. I would agree with you if Mc Guigan hadnt been hit and tried to get Miskella sent off but he was hit off the ball.
Miskella's behaviour was outside the law. There's a penalty for it. It wasn't applied. McGuigan's behaviour was also outside the law twice - the initial sly blow and the simulation. There is a penalty for both. Those penalties weren't applied either. In natural justice, do you honestly think it would have been fair to punish Miskella and let Mcguigan off? Especially when you consider the relative effects if the law had been correctly applied in each case - Miskella misses the AIF, while McGuigan misses nothing?
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 04:39:58 PM
TBH, you dont know how hard he was hit
If you are punched in the head & dont react do you think the fella that done it is going to get away with it?
I dont know how hard he was hit no, but to knock a fully grown man to the ground you have to be hit a right slap. To keep him down he'd need to be near concussed.
If someone hit me in a match (which has happened before), I prefer to get him back in a way that stays within the rules of the game, a score, a block, hard tackling, let him know I'm there. Not f**king fall to the ground and roll around. I'm not trying to look like a tough guy here, but falling like that and holding your head would embarrass me. I would have to ask serious questions about myself if I was at that caper.
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 04:44:16 PM
Quote from: No way ref on August 27, 2009, 04:35:42 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 04:27:34 PM
No we're not. We're talking about a girlie slap. He wasn't hurt. He was putting it on. He was trying to get his opponent into trouble. He was aping soccer behaviour. He was not behaving in a manly fashion. He was exhibiting the kind of behaviour that has become too prevalent in the game and should be eradicated.
In my opinion.
Herein lies the problem. When John Miskella threw the punch he was getting himself into trouble. Mc Guigans actions after the event shouldn't matter. I would agree with you if Mc Guigan hadnt been hit and tried to get Miskella sent off but he was hit off the ball.
Miskella's behaviour was outside the law. There's a penalty for it. It wasn't applied. McGuigan's behaviour was also outside the law twice - the initial sly blow and the simulation. There is a penalty for both. Those penalties weren't applied either. In natural justice, do you honestly think it would have been fair to punish Miskella and let Mcguigan off? Especially when you consider the relative effects if the law had been correctly applied in each case - Miskella misses the AIF, while McGuigan misses nothing?
:D :D
You are good hardy, I will give you that
You want Mc Guigan banned for getting hit on the head and going to ground
How do you know how hard he was hit?
BTW, a classic :D
How do I know how hard he was hit? I have eyes. I've been hit a lot harder than that. I'd be surprised if you haven't too, if you've played football. Did I go down like I'd been hit with a sledgehammer? No. Did you?
So the question again: why would it be right to punish Miskella for hitting McGuigan, but not to punish Mcguigan for hitting Miskella first, then making a show of himself?
What did you see Mc Guigan do?
If the referee seen it would he have sent him off?
What did you see Miskella do?
If the referee seen it would he have sent him off? (obviously we have to discount the notion that the clown was refereeing it)
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 04:59:55 PM
What did you see Mc Guigan do?
If the referee seen it would he have sent him off?
What did you see Miskella do?
If the referee seen it would he have sent him off? (obviously we have to discount the notion that the clown was refereeing it)
McGuigan struck Miskella. (Or maybe Miskella started the whole thing by simulating a strike, It wasn't as OTT as Miskela's simulation, but very expert - just exactly how you'd react if someone hit you in the balls - a sudden backward thrust of the nether regions). The penalty for striking is a red card.
Miskella struck McGuigan. The penalty for striking is a red card.
McGuigan acted as if he'd been badly hurt. The penalty for simulation ids a yell9ow card. But this shouldn't matter as the red card would have superseded it.
Hardy i honestly think you are wrong. You may be right but i dont think so. And anyway when did natural justice supercede the rules. Your arguement that miskella would miss an all ireland final but mc guigan would miss nothing so it wouldnt be fair on miskella is naive. If you break the rules you should pay the price. Ironically the only people now who can suffer from Bannons mistake are from either Meath or Kerry
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 05:05:40 PM
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 04:59:55 PM
What did you see Mc Guigan do?
If the referee seen it would he have sent him off?
What did you see Miskella do?
If the referee seen it would he have sent him off? (obviously we have to discount the notion that the clown was refereeing it)
McGuigan struck Miskella. (Or maybe Miskella started the whole thing by simulating a strike, It wasn't as OTT as Miskela's simulation, but very expert - just exactly how you'd react if someone hit you in the balls - a sudden backward thrust of the nether regions). The penalty for striking is a red card.
If's & maybe's
The jury dismiss your case
Quote from: No way ref on August 27, 2009, 05:11:43 PM
Hardy i honestly think you are wrong. You may be right but i dont think so. And anyway when did natural justice supercede the rules. Your arguement that miskella would miss an all ireland final but mc guigan would miss nothing so it wouldnt be fair on miskella is naive. If you break the rules you should pay the price. Ironically the only people now who can suffer from Bannons mistake are from either Meath or Kerry
Leaving aside our different interpretations of what we saw, I'm just suggesting that Bannon's failure to apply the rules correctly has served natural justice, as it would have been unfair, given the way suspensions are imposed on a time basis rather than on a match basis, that even if both had been sanctioned under the rules, Miskella's punishment would have been severe, while McGuigan's would have been non-existent. As you say, if you break the rules, you should pay the price. But it's only fair that the price should be the same for everybody.
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 05:12:17 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 05:05:40 PM
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 04:59:55 PM
What did you see Mc Guigan do?
If the referee seen it would he have sent him off?
What did you see Miskella do?
If the referee seen it would he have sent him off? (obviously we have to discount the notion that the clown was refereeing it)
McGuigan struck Miskella. (Or maybe Miskella started the whole thing by simulating a strike, It wasn't as OTT as Miskela's simulation, but very expert - just exactly how you'd react if someone hit you in the balls - a sudden backward thrust of the nether regions). The penalty for striking is a red card.
If's & maybe's
The jury dismiss your case
Oh well that settles it then.
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 04:16:42 PM
Being punched in the head and knocked out is serious injury. Being punched on the head and falling in a pile for a suitable amount of time ;) means he had alterior motives. There is no way in hell that punch was hard enough to knock a man to the ground and keep him there for several minutes.
This is going on too often in our sport.
thats not the point. The rules are not attached with a memorandum where the referees can decide action based on the force of a punch . Its either a punch or its not. At least in soccer its clearcut- use the fist and you're off. Anyone who thinks the game is better off with lads punching the chops off each other has a a screw loose.
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 05:20:47 PM
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 05:12:17 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 05:05:40 PM
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 04:59:55 PM
What did you see Mc Guigan do?
If the referee seen it would he have sent him off?
What did you see Miskella do?
If the referee seen it would he have sent him off? (obviously we have to discount the notion that the clown was refereeing it)
McGuigan struck Miskella. (Or maybe Miskella started the whole thing by simulating a strike, It wasn't as OTT as Miskela's simulation, but very expert - just exactly how you'd react if someone hit you in the balls - a sudden backward thrust of the nether regions). The penalty for striking is a red card.
If's & maybe's
The jury dismiss your case
Oh well that settles it then.
You
think Mc Guigan struck Miskella, unless you have evidence to the contrary off course ;)
Miskella did strike Mc Guigan
Pretty clear cut
Indiana I dont want to have to say this again - I AGREE HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SENT OFF!!! There is no place for cold boxes.
I am talking about seperate issue now of why McGuigan felt the need to lie on the ground for several minutes? In my honest opinion that box was not enough to floor him in the first place never mind keep him down.
He should be ashamed of himself too. Miskella shouldnt have reacted the way he did, but I'd rather see him do that than fall in a pile letting on McGuigan hurt him.
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 05:23:54 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 05:20:47 PM
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 05:12:17 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 05:05:40 PM
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 04:59:55 PM
What did you see Mc Guigan do?
If the referee seen it would he have sent him off?
What did you see Miskella do?
If the referee seen it would he have sent him off? (obviously we have to discount the notion that the clown was refereeing it)
McGuigan struck Miskella. (Or maybe Miskella started the whole thing by simulating a strike, It wasn't as OTT as Miskela's simulation, but very expert - just exactly how you'd react if someone hit you in the balls - a sudden backward thrust of the nether regions). The penalty for striking is a red card.
If's & maybe's
The jury dismiss your case
Oh well that settles it then.
You think Mc Guigan struck Miskella, unless you have evidence to the contrary off course ;)
Miskella did strike Mc Guigan
Pretty clear cut
Do you think McGuigan
didn't strike Miskella? Be honest now.
And do you think McGiuigan's carry-on was honourable? Be honest on that too.
Hardy,
You either have eyesight problems or your stirring the pot. McGuigan poked him in the ribs with his elbow.
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 05:26:21 PM
Indiana I dont want to have to say this again - I AGREE HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SENT OFF!!! There is no place for cold boxes.
I am talking about seperate issue now of why McGuigan felt the need to lie on the ground for several minutes? In my honest opinion that box was not enough to floor him in the first place never mind keep him down.
He should be ashamed of himself too. Miskella shouldnt have reacted the way he did, but I'd rather see him do that than fall in a pile letting on McGuigan hurt him.
well maybe if you'd nearly lost your eye in a similar incident you'd feel a bit differently to getting a smack in the head.
Quote from: Hardy link=topic=13516.msg630686#msg630686
Do you think McGuiganb]didn't [/b]strike Miskella? Be honest now.
And do you think McGiuigan's carry-on was honourable? Be honest on that too.
Honestly, he probably did, but Im not certain on that. IMHO Miskella was at Mc Guigan and Mc Guigan drew back, then Miskella struck.
Its not often a forward starts on a defender to be fair
Honourable - no
But he was struck in the head. We dont know how hard, but he was struck & went down
Quote from: INDIANA on August 27, 2009, 05:29:59 PM
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 05:26:21 PM
Indiana I dont want to have to say this again - I AGREE HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SENT OFF!!! There is no place for cold boxes.
I am talking about seperate issue now of why McGuigan felt the need to lie on the ground for several minutes? In my honest opinion that box was not enough to floor him in the first place never mind keep him down.
He should be ashamed of himself too. Miskella shouldnt have reacted the way he did, but I'd rather see him do that than fall in a pile letting on McGuigan hurt him.
well maybe if you'd nearly lost your eye in a similar incident you'd feel a bit differently to getting a smack in the head.
A smack on the BACK of the head??
As irrelevant a comment as I have seen.
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 05:28:00 PM
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 05:23:54 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 05:20:47 PM
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 05:12:17 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 05:05:40 PM
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 04:59:55 PM
What did you see Mc Guigan do?
If the referee seen it would he have sent him off?
What did you see Miskella do?
If the referee seen it would he have sent him off? (obviously we have to discount the notion that the clown was refereeing it)
McGuigan struck Miskella. (Or maybe Miskella started the whole thing by simulating a strike, It wasn't as OTT as Miskela's simulation, but very expert - just exactly how you'd react if someone hit you in the balls - a sudden backward thrust of the nether regions). The penalty for striking is a red card.
If's & maybe's
The jury dismiss your case
Oh well that settles it then.
You think Mc Guigan struck Miskella, unless you have evidence to the contrary off course ;)
Miskella did strike Mc Guigan
Pretty clear cut
Do you think McGuigan didn't strike Miskella? Be honest now.
And do you think McGiuigan's carry-on was honourable? Be honest on that too.
Hardy my view would be that McGuigan and Miskella were pulling at each other. McGuigan might have thrown the elbow back into Miskella's chest( not even sure of this) but nothing that doesn't happen twenty times between men during the game.
Then Miskella threw the punch ( my view of it was that it was certainly a punch all be it not that powerful) and McGuigan went down to easily for my liking.
Proper outcome should have been a Red for Miskella. I wouldn't have been overly happy with McGuigan going down so easily but I believe it would be hard for a ref to justify booking him for diving especially when there is no doubt there is contact.
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 05:31:00 PM
Quote from: Hardy link=topic=13516.msg630686#msg630686
Do you think McGuiganb]didn't [/b]strike Miskella? Be honest now.
And do you think McGiuigan's carry-on was honourable? Be honest on that too.
Honestly, he probably did, but Im not certain on that. IMHO Miskella was at Mc Guigan and Mc Guigan drew back, then Miskella struck.
Its not often a forward starts on a defender to be fair
Honourable - no
But he was struck in the head. We dont know how hard, but he was struck & went down
So because he was struck in the head its ok to go down?
If he was hit a box on the arm, a real hard one, would it be "acceptable" to fall in a pile?
There was no serious injury done (as can be seen by him getting up a few minutes later and simply rubbing his head*) then he had no call to fall down.
* If something is that sore should you really be rubbing it? I've never heard of rubbing a broken leg to ease the pain ???
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 06:05:59 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on August 27, 2009, 05:29:59 PM
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 05:26:21 PM
Indiana I dont want to have to say this again - I AGREE HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SENT OFF!!! There is no place for cold boxes.
I am talking about seperate issue now of why McGuigan felt the need to lie on the ground for several minutes? In my honest opinion that box was not enough to floor him in the first place never mind keep him down.
He should be ashamed of himself too. Miskella shouldnt have reacted the way he did, but I'd rather see him do that than fall in a pile letting on McGuigan hurt him.
well maybe if you'd nearly lost your eye in a similar incident you'd feel a bit differently to getting a smack in the head.
A smack on the BACK of the head??
As irrelevant a comment as I have seen.
As irrrelevent as your lack of understanding of the rulebook.
Quote from: INDIANA on August 27, 2009, 06:15:45 PM
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 06:05:59 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on August 27, 2009, 05:29:59 PM
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 05:26:21 PM
Indiana I dont want to have to say this again - I AGREE HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SENT OFF!!! There is no place for cold boxes.
I am talking about seperate issue now of why McGuigan felt the need to lie on the ground for several minutes? In my honest opinion that box was not enough to floor him in the first place never mind keep him down.
He should be ashamed of himself too. Miskella shouldnt have reacted the way he did, but I'd rather see him do that than fall in a pile letting on McGuigan hurt him.
well maybe if you'd nearly lost your eye in a similar incident you'd feel a bit differently to getting a smack in the head.
A smack on the BACK of the head??
As irrelevant a comment as I have seen.
As irrrelevent as your lack of understanding of the rulebook.
Indian please tell me you're taking the piss.
When have I ever said Miskella shouldnt have been sent off. Jesus H Christ read my posts before replying to them.
Two issues:
1) Miskella - DEFINITE RED. No questions, totally agree.
2) McGuigan - impact of the box was not enough to put him down at all, never mind the length of time he lay in a pile for. I have nothing against him personally, I am simply using him as an example of how our game is going.
Pleeeeeease tell me why I dont understand the rule book?
If someone punches you in the head playing football you have two options in my opinion - you punch him back and risk getting sent off yourself, or you go down to draw the refs attention to the incident (which is why mcguigan went down) and increase the chances of getting the dirty hoor who hit you sent off - which is exactly what he deserves! In the context of this match mcguigan took the correct action! If it was a local club reserve game - i'd have hit him back!
What would you have done sidelinekick? Stay on your feet, then what?
You don't seem to see Mc Guigan's reaction was irrelevent once Miskella hit him in the head. Thats a no-no in all contact sports as the rulebook states. So its irrelevent debate really.
That would only be an issue if Mc Guigan wasn't hit and he was feigning injury. And he was hit. End of story.
Quote from: BennyHarp on August 27, 2009, 06:34:43 PMStay on your feet, then what?
Play on and don't act like a wuss.
Quote from: INDIANA on August 27, 2009, 06:36:21 PM
You don't seem to see Mc Guigan's reaction was irrelevent once Miskella hit him in the head. Thats a no-no in all contact sports as the rulebook states. So its irrelevent debate really.
That would only be an issue if Mc Guigan wasn't hit and he was feigning injury. And he was hit. End of story.
It's worse than I thought and I'm beginning to despair for the soul of the game - people actually think it's OK to pretend you're hurt when you're not. Sad.
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 06:38:22 PM
Quote from: BennyHarp on August 27, 2009, 06:34:43 PMStay on your feet, then what?
Play on and don't act like a wuss.
If you are telling the truth then you are a fool
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 06:38:22 PM
Quote from: BennyHarp on August 27, 2009, 06:34:43 PMStay on your feet, then what?
Play on and don't act like a wuss.
So your playing a game of football - you'd be quite happy for someone to hit you a box on the head, you'd just ignore it and play on? Why should that person get away with it just so you can prove you are not a "wuss"?
Where did I say I'd be happy to be hit on the head? I would just be ashamed to be a wuss.
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 06:42:13 PM
Where did I say I'd be happy to be hit on the head? I would just be ashamed to be a wuss.
So your not happy about it - yet you just ignore it and play on, incase someone calls you a wuss? Its a strange world we live in!
Benny you dont only have "two options", you can do what Hardy says and get on with the game. Drive every tackle into him after that, beta him for every ball. But falling down to get him sent off? I'm with Hardy.
Indiana its not irrelevant. I'm breaking it into two parts:
1st part is the box - dirty action. Red card. Simple. We both agree on that yes?
2nd part - McGuigan goes down for several minutes then gets back to his feet after the physio treats him ::)
Do you:
a) Think the box was hard enough to knock him down?
b) Hard enough to keep him down?
c) Do you think its ok to lie down simply because you've been hit on the head?
I'm not syaing for one minute its ok to be boxed, nor am I saying no one should ever lie down ever! But there is no way the contact made warrants a 3 or 4 minute period on the ground trying to recover.
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 06:45:24 PM
Benny you dont only have "two options", you can do what Hardy says and get on with the game. Drive every tackle into him after that, beta him for every ball. But falling down to get him sent off? I'm with Hardy.
Indiana its not irrelevant. I'm breaking it into two parts:
1st part is the box - dirty action. Red card. Simple. We both agree on that yes?
2nd part - McGuigan goes down for several minutes then gets back to his feet after the physio treats him ::)
Do you:
a) Think the box was hard enough to knock him down?
b) Hard enough to keep him down?
c) Do you think its ok to lie down simply because you've been hit on the head?
I'm not syaing for one minute its ok to be boxed, nor am I saying no one should ever lie down ever! But there is no way the contact made warrants a 3 or 4 minute period on the ground trying to recover.
IN that case by your assumption we should only have referees who are also the holders of medical degrees -since they can then make an assessment of whether a player is faking it or not. Gets sillier by the minute.
Quote from: INDIANA on August 27, 2009, 06:53:54 PM
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 06:45:24 PM
Benny you dont only have "two options", you can do what Hardy says and get on with the game. Drive every tackle into him after that, beta him for every ball. But falling down to get him sent off? I'm with Hardy.
Indiana its not irrelevant. I'm breaking it into two parts:
1st part is the box - dirty action. Red card. Simple. We both agree on that yes?
2nd part - McGuigan goes down for several minutes then gets back to his feet after the physio treats him ::)
Do you:
a) Think the box was hard enough to knock him down?
b) Hard enough to keep him down?
c) Do you think its ok to lie down simply because you've been hit on the head?
I'm not syaing for one minute its ok to be boxed, nor am I saying no one should ever lie down ever! But there is no way the contact made warrants a 3 or 4 minute period on the ground trying to recover.
IN that case by your assumption we should only have referees who are also the holders of medical degrees -since they can then make an assessment of whether a player is faking it or not. Gets sillier by the minute.
You said it ::)
feck me - you are like a broken record SLK - did a Tyrone man do something to your girlfriend or something
Your obsession with anything Tyrone ranks up there with Fearon's obsession with eating Linfield / IFA / /Rangers / Arsenal /not winning a competition
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 06:39:48 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on August 27, 2009, 06:36:21 PM
You don't seem to see Mc Guigan's reaction was irrelevent once Miskella hit him in the head. Thats a no-no in all contact sports as the rulebook states. So its irrelevent debate really.
That would only be an issue if Mc Guigan wasn't hit and he was feigning injury. And he was hit. End of story.
It's worse than I thought and I'm beginning to despair for the soul of the game - people actually think it's OK to pretend you're hurt when you're not. Sad.
Doen't matter whether he was hurt or not.....as a very famous Prime Minister once said...'a foul is a foul is a foul...' or words to that effect.
The craziest thing about all this is that if Alan O Connor logged onto the board to see if he was getting any sympathy he would find that John Miskella and Brian Mc Guigan (and SLK) have hijacked his thread :D
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 09:06:46 AM
The GAA, well football anyway, is heading the way of soccer. McGuigan lay on the ground as if he'd been shot, I'm sure most people here would have got the odd slap / box to the back of the head, but it was hardly enough to knock him down and keep him down! I for one feel embarrassed if I have to lie down for any sorta injury. A lot of players these days seem to grab any opportunity with both hands.
Steven O'Neill lay as if he was dead in the first half of the game, until the phusio came on and miraculously brought him back round. Is it an attention seeking thing?
It's a tactic Tyrone use when they are behind and when the pressure is on them to break up the other team's momentum
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on August 27, 2009, 08:01:14 PM
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 09:06:46 AM
The GAA, well football anyway, is heading the way of soccer. McGuigan lay on the ground as if he'd been shot, I'm sure most people here would have got the odd slap / box to the back of the head, but it was hardly enough to knock him down and keep him down! I for one feel embarrassed if I have to lie down for any sorta injury. A lot of players these days seem to grab any opportunity with both hands.
Steven O'Neill lay as if he was dead in the first half of the game, until the phusio came on and miraculously brought him back round. Is it an attention seeking thing?
It's a tactic all teams use when they are behind and when the pressure is on them to break up the other team's momentum
fixed that for you
You shouldn't have bothered Gabriel, I meant what I typed
Quote from: popinpoput on August 27, 2009, 07:37:05 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 06:39:48 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on August 27, 2009, 06:36:21 PM
You don't seem to see Mc Guigan's reaction was irrelevent once Miskella hit him in the head. Thats a no-no in all contact sports as the rulebook states. So its irrelevent debate really.
That would only be an issue if Mc Guigan wasn't hit and he was feigning injury. And he was hit. End of story.
It's worse than I thought and I'm beginning to despair for the soul of the game - people actually think it's OK to pretend you're hurt when you're not. Sad.
Doen't matter whether he was hurt or not.....as a very famous Prime Minister once said...'a foul is a foul is a foul...' or words to that effect.
It really does seem there's a generation growing up now, substantial numbers of whom believe this.
The end result is immaterial here: the intention is all that counts, and when you strike to the head the intention is unwholesome and dangerous (whichever way it's spun), and is therefore automatically a red card offence (what's the alternative, a rapid reaction board of injury assessment on the sideline?).
Can understand Hardy's frustration though, his lads can stand on heads and everything without so much as a caution :P
People can't seem to get their heads around the fact that we're talking about two different subjects. Nobody is disputing the rules or the justice of sending people off for hitting other people. As a separate issue, we're discussing the behaviour of people who feign injury. Take the foul as read. Take the red card as read and red. That's the law satisfied. The striker is in the shower. Now - what are your thoughts on people who behave as if they've been poleaxed when nothing or little enough has befallen them? Please try to answer without reference to the perpetrator of the foul.
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 09:20:21 PM
People can't seem to get their heads around the fact that we're talking about two different subjects. Nobody is disputing the rules or the justice of sending people off for hitting other people. As a separate issue, we're discussing the behaviour of people who feign injury. Take the foul as read. Take the red card as read and red. That's the law satisfied. The striker is in the shower. Now - what are your thoughts on people who behave as if they've been poleaxed when nothing or little enough has befallen them? Please try to answer without reference to the perpetrator of the foul.
its wrong BUT i would do what i had to to ensure that someone who deserved to be sent off was sent off
Hardy, I'll repeat a posting I made a few weeks ago on a separate thread.
A clubmate of mine got his jaw broken recently as the result of a judas punch. I've no doubt at all that the perpetrator had no intention of causing serious injury. But the point is that he did, and I'd have no qualms at all about him getting a year long ban from the GAA. Red card bans continue as normal for throwing a punch, but if a man ends up in hospital, the full ban comes in.
With that sort of punishment it might make players think twice before throwing a sucker punch.
If the perpetrator isn't obvious to the referee, I'd even suggest banning his club from all activity until they put his name forward. That would go a long way to getting rid of the GAA attitude that you have to protect your own to save face, even if they deserve a punishment.
How is this related to your comments?
Well, you've got two options as a player when you're hit off the ball. You either go to ground and hope the referee sorts the situation out, or you go swinging and hope the referee goes easy. The first option is infinitely more sensible. Players though shouldn't have to make that choice. When you play football, you should (and should want to) get involved in the physical side of things. But that doesn't include being a punchbag. And when fellas like Miskella can get off scot free for throwing punches (and more or less scot free should they break a jaw), the GAA isn't protecting its players.
should everyone who throws a punch get a year then wobbler or only those who break a jaw?
Those that put a man in hospital Duffle King. It's a simple enough system. Throw punches by all means. If you get caught, you get a month. If you do harm, you get a year. The second one is the key deterrent, and I believe the measure would clean the game up enormously.
Let me re-iterate that I'm not talking about hard football, or players getting hurt in challenges.
I'm talking about when everyone involved in a game turns around and there's a fella lying on the floor with his jaw in two pieces.
Quote from: DuffleKing on August 27, 2009, 09:36:49 PM
should everyone who throws a punch get a year then wobbler or only those who break a jaw?
Those who throw a punch should be punished as per the very clear rule in the rule book, so once again discipline has descended into farce. Having said that, I'm glad that Miskella won't miss the final, but if there was even a smidgen of consistency here I doubt very much that he would have taken that chance in the first place, his red mist notwithstanding.
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 09:20:21 PM
People can't seem to get their heads around the fact that we're talking about two different subjects. Nobody is disputing the rules or the justice of sending people off for hitting other people. As a separate issue, we're discussing the behaviour of people who feign injury. Take the foul as read. Take the red card as read and red. That's the law satisfied. The striker is in the shower. Now - what are your thoughts on people who behave as if they've been poleaxed when nothing or little enough has befallen them? Please try to answer without reference to the perpetrator of the foul.
How can you tell the force of the punch?
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 27, 2009, 04:48:23 PM
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 04:39:58 PM
TBH, you dont know how hard he was hit
If you are punched in the head & dont react do you think the fella that done it is going to get away with it?
I dont know how hard he was hit no, but to knock a fully grown man to the ground you have to be hit a right slap. To keep him down he'd need to be near concussed.
If someone hit me in a match (which has happened before), I prefer to get him back in a way that stays within the rules of the game, a score, a block, hard tackling, let him know I'm there. Not f**king fall to the ground and roll around. I'm not trying to look like a tough guy here, but falling like that and holding your head would embarrass me. I would have to ask serious questions about myself if I was at that caper.
may I have an autograph please?
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 09:20:21 PM
Now - what are your thoughts on people who behave as if they've been poleaxed when nothing or little enough has befallen them? Please try to answer without reference to the perpetrator of the foul.
This is where a woeful referee will bring out the worst, potentially, and that's why there was the mass breakdown of discipline on Sunday last. Bannon had lost all respect from the players (at last). If a referee is as bad as Bannon was and you've been clocked and you know that unless you go down you will get nothing, because the referee is as all-seeing and all-knowing as a priest in a brothel (and as all-seeing and all-knowing as a priest in a pulpit where Cork was concerned :P), then I can understand why a player will go down since it's the only way that the muppet in the middle will seek to consult with his co-officials. That's not to condone, however, but it's not good enough that a player who commits a blatant red card offence will get off scot-free due to the ineptitude of the main official unless that referee is forced to cop on to look and consult with those that are there to help him, and up to which point he has virtually ignored.
That's not the same as a player who's not been touched going down, different situtation, and to be condemned outright.
Quote from: INDIANA on August 27, 2009, 09:57:36 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 27, 2009, 09:20:21 PM
People can't seem to get their heads around the fact that we're talking about two different subjects. Nobody is disputing the rules or the justice of sending people off for hitting other people. As a separate issue, we're discussing the behaviour of people who feign injury. Take the foul as read. Take the red card as read and red. That's the law satisfied. The striker is in the shower. Now - what are your thoughts on people who behave as if they've been poleaxed when nothing or little enough has befallen them? Please try to answer without reference to the perpetrator of the foul.
How can you tell the force of the punch?
The hand and the elbow have the same status in the Gaa, use either aggressively and you (if you are caught) are off. Therefore McGuigan deserves the same attention in this as Miskella.
Bannon saw nothing, his umpire 70 yards (61 metres) away must have thought he saw something but couldn't be sure.
If you argue they both should have got red then fair enough. But some official would have to have seen it clearly for that to happen.
IMHO Miskella has benefited from getting the yellow as if he wasn't punished on the day the Gaa might have felt they had to be seen to do something and a retrospective yellow card would hardly have washed with the media.
Despite some hysterical posts here it is not clear cut whether either dig made contact and we are all better off without Frank Murphy overturning yet another poorly thought through suspension.
muppet what are you on about
Quote from: No way ref on August 27, 2009, 11:27:05 PM
muppet what are you on about
Don't worry about it Mr. Bannon.
Quote from: hardstation on August 27, 2009, 11:30:21 PM
Let him play the final, I have no issue with that (in a feck it, he got away with it way). If they win, he should hand his medal back as he doesn't deserve it.*
However, this has set a precedent and next year will be interesting. Video evidence is gone after this.
*That was just a joke for Sidelinekick.
Am I correct in saying video evidence can only be used in instances where the officials took no action?
Quote from: muppet on August 27, 2009, 11:29:23 PM
Quote from: No way ref on August 27, 2009, 11:27:05 PM
muppet what are you on about
Don't worry about it Mr. Bannon.
Your notion that Mc Guigan and Miskella should recieve the same punishment would indicate you are Mr Bannon
Quote from: No way ref on August 27, 2009, 11:33:22 PM
Quote from: muppet on August 27, 2009, 11:29:23 PM
Quote from: No way ref on August 27, 2009, 11:27:05 PM
muppet what are you on about
Don't worry about it Mr. Bannon.
Your notion that Mc Guigan and Miskella should recieve the same punishment would indicate you are Mr Bannon
Quote from: J70 on August 24, 2008, 06:59:49 PM
RULE 5 - AGGRESSIVE FOULS
5.1 To strike or attempt to strike an opponent with the head, arm, elbow, hand or knee.
5.2 To kick or attempt to kick an opponent.
5.3 To stamp on an opponent.
5.4 To behave in any manner which is dangerous to an opponent.
5.5 To strike or attempt to strike any match official. To interfere with or use abusive language or conduct to a match official.
PENALTY FOR THE ABOVE FOULS -
(i) Order offender off.
(ii) Free kick from where the foul occurred except as provided under EXCEPTIONS of Rule 2.2.
Quote from: hardstation on August 27, 2009, 11:33:11 PM
Quote from: muppet on August 27, 2009, 11:32:36 PM
Quote from: hardstation on August 27, 2009, 11:30:21 PM
Let him play the final, I have no issue with that (in a feck it, he got away with it way). If they win, he should hand his medal back as he doesn't deserve it.*
However, this has set a precedent and next year will be interesting. Video evidence is gone after this.
*That was just a joke for Sidelinekick.
Am I correct in saying video evidence can only be used in instances where the officials took no action?
No. That rule is long gone.
Operational Principles
(1) A committee or Council in Charge may use video evidence to substantiate/complement/clarify what is contained in a Referees Report.
(2) A Committee or Council in Charge or Investigating Committee may use video evidence to formulate and prefer charges in relation to alleged offences not contained in a Referee's Report.
(3) Where a member or unit requests permission to use video evidence in any proceedings, the member or unit shall make such request in writing to the Committee or Council in Charge in advance of the date of hearing, stating the reason(s) for such request and specifying the source of the video evidence.
The Subcommittee further recommends that where the Games' Administration
Committee of the Central Council proposes to use video evidence to determine
whether a charge should be initiated against a member or unit, it shall appoint a
Subcommittee from within its membership to view the video and establish whether a
prima facie case exists. The Subcommittee shall report its findings to the parent
Committee and take no further part in the disciplinary process."
http://www.sportsdra.ie/documents/dra42005final.pdf (http://www.sportsdra.ie/documents/dra42005final.pdf)
Jeez muppet, there's justifying your moniker and there's justifying your moniker, as if you didn't have enough of it last night.
Mc Guigan's elbow: dubious, at best
Miskella's punch: blatant
Quote from: hardstation on August 27, 2009, 11:30:21 PM
Let him play the final, I have no issue with that (in a feck it, he got away with it way). If they win, he should hand his medal back as he doesn't deserve it.*
However, this has set a precedent and next year will be interesting. Video evidence is gone after this.
*That was just a joke for Sidelinekick.
:D
Gabriel, its nothing to do with Tyrone, I am simply using McGuigan as an example, as it was the last one to happen. I have also said many times that it's not only Tyrone and its something creeping into the game in general, at club levels. Read all my posts on the matter before commenting on my "obsession" with Tyrone.
MCGUIGAN IS JUST AN EXAMPLE
I have asked you this before SK
Can you differentiate between getting struck & going down and feigning a bad tackle?
The second point is what is ruining the game, not the first
Quote from: full back on August 28, 2009, 08:24:21 AM
I have asked you this before SK
Can you differentiate between getting struck & going down and feigning a bad tackle?
The second point is what is ruining the game, not the first
Sorry if I havent answered it, but no it would be hard to differentiate, thats why I'm syaing the players need to take it upon themselves not to fall at every opportunity.
It takes a mighty box to knock a fully grown man to the ground keep him there would you not agree?
So he should have turned the other cheek then?
Dont give me this stand like a man & take it stuff
A man struck & deserves to be punished. This is the best way to draw the referee's attention to the incident
If he hadnt went down nothing at all would have happened
Quote from: full back on August 28, 2009, 08:34:05 AM
So he should have turned the other cheek then?
Dont give me this stand like a man & take it stuff
A man struck & deserves to be punished. This is the best way to draw the referee's attention to the incident
If he hadnt went down nothing at all would have happened
Obviously this is where we differ on opinions. It'll just go round in circles but heres my take on it:
If you break two two hypothetical incidents (in case Gab gets his knickers in a twist) –
1) A man throws a box – he deserves to be punished, the force is irrelevant. Action – red card.
2) A man lies on the ground to get the man sent off – he got boxed so yes perhaps he has the right to go down. My gripe with this is if he actually had the need to go down.
Its nothing to do with standing up like a man and taking it, and maybe you cant see this because you like soccer, but things like this will ruin our game. The one reason why I cannot stand soccer is all the diving and rolling around. Granted this hypothetical person might have take a box to the back of the head but no way was it hard enough to knock him down and keep him down. Fake physio work going on for 3 or 4 mins. Joke.
Answer my question please:
Do you think the box was hard enough to knock him down and keep him down?
If you're answer is yes (which I doubt it will be) then fair enough.
If you're answer is no, then you are condoning lying down to get a player sent off (even though he deserved to go) when his injury didn't justify the time he spent on the ground.
Quote from: SidelineKick link=topic=13516.msg631043#msg631043
Answer my question please:
Do you think the box was hard enough to knock him down and keep him down?
/quote]
Doubtful
You say:
My gripe with this is if he actually had the need to go down
If he had just stood there Miskella would have got off scot-free and the game would descend into anarchy with hardmen running around the field hitting boys boxes off the ball all the time
Quote from: BennyHarp on August 27, 2009, 06:34:43 PM
If someone punches you in the head playing football you have two options in my opinion - you punch him back and risk getting sent off yourself, or you go down to draw the refs attention to the incident (which is why mcguigan went down) and increase the chances of getting the dirty hoor who hit you sent off - which is exactly what he deserves! In the context of this match mcguigan took the correct action! If it was a local club reserve game - i'd have hit him back!
What would you have done sidelinekick? Stay on your feet, then what?
So Aidan O'Mahony was right to collapse when he got touched against Cork, Miskella should have collapsed when McGuigan elbowed him also and any time any player suffers any contact on the pitch he should fall over straight away to get the free
Quote from: thewobbler on August 27, 2009, 09:40:14 PM
Those that put a man in hospital Duffle King. It's a simple enough system. Throw punches by all means. If you get caught, you get a month. If you do harm, you get a year. The second one is the key deterrent, and I believe the measure would clean the game up enormously.
Let me re-iterate that I'm not talking about hard football, or players getting hurt in challenges.
I'm talking about when everyone involved in a game turns around and there's a fella lying on the floor with his jaw in two pieces.
So if i want some cowboy that i've goaded into striking me to get a year i simply feign wooziness and wobble my way to hospital?
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 28, 2009, 08:57:02 AM
Quote from: BennyHarp on August 27, 2009, 06:34:43 PM
If someone punches you in the head playing football you have two options in my opinion - you punch him back and risk getting sent off yourself, or you go down to draw the refs attention to the incident (which is why mcguigan went down) and increase the chances of getting the dirty hoor who hit you sent off - which is exactly what he deserves! In the context of this match mcguigan took the correct action! If it was a local club reserve game - i'd have hit him back!
What would you have done sidelinekick? Stay on your feet, then what?
So Aidan O'Mahony was right to collapse when he got touched against Cork, Miskella should have collapsed when McGuigan elbowed him also and any time any player suffers any contact on the pitch he should fall over straight away to get the free
DFS are you being serious here or sarcastic?
FB
Let me ask you this:
Someone hit Chrissy McKaigue in the first round of the Ulster Championship, it wasn't much of a box, but a box nonetheless. Was he right to fall to the ground? Because from memory there was outrage at his diving and play acting to get a man sent off, something I agreed had no place in our game.
McKaigue was told to get up.
Chances are if you throw a box you will be caught at that level, which Miskella was (baffling as to how he stayed on), but I have yet to see a game descend in to anarchy because someone
didnt lie down.
[quote author=SidelineKick link=topic=13516.msg631065#msg631065
Chances are if you throw a box you will be caught at that level, which Miskella was (baffling as to how he stayed on), but I have yet to see a game descend in to anarchy because someone didnt lie down.
[/quote]
As you saw on Sunday the referee was brutal, many players noticed this & took advantage of it
Now if boys were throwing boxes throughout the match & standing toe to toe how do you think it would end?
Jesus FB are you actually serious?
What do you think linesmen and umpires are for?
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 28, 2009, 09:11:54 AM
Jesus FB are you actually serious?
What do you think linesmen and umpires are for?
What they should be for & what they actually do are two totally different issues
We will have to agree to differ on this one
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 28, 2009, 09:06:42 AM
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 28, 2009, 08:57:02 AM
Quote from: BennyHarp on August 27, 2009, 06:34:43 PM
If someone punches you in the head playing football you have two options in my opinion - you punch him back and risk getting sent off yourself, or you go down to draw the refs attention to the incident (which is why mcguigan went down) and increase the chances of getting the dirty hoor who hit you sent off - which is exactly what he deserves! In the context of this match mcguigan took the correct action! If it was a local club reserve game - i'd have hit him back!
What would you have done sidelinekick? Stay on your feet, then what?
So Aidan O'Mahony was right to collapse when he got touched against Cork, Miskella should have collapsed when McGuigan elbowed him also and any time any player suffers any contact on the pitch he should fall over straight away to get the free
DFS are you being serious here or sarcastic?
FB
Let me ask you this:
Someone hit Chrissy McKaigue in the first round of the Ulster Championship, it wasn't much of a box, but a box nonetheless. Was he right to fall to the ground? Because from memory there was outrage at his diving and play acting to get a man sent off, something I agreed had no place in our game.
McKaigue was told to get up.
Chances are if you throw a box you will be caught at that level, which Miskella was (baffling as to how he stayed on), but I have yet to see a game descend in to anarchy because someone didnt lie down.
Who was it that lay down when Hub Hughes hit them a dig in the guts in 06 Omagh Sideline?
Do you think that if B McG didnt hit the deck on Sunday would Miskella have been sent off/booked/ or receieved no punishment???
Quote from: full back on August 28, 2009, 09:14:41 AM
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 28, 2009, 09:11:54 AM
Jesus FB are you actually serious?
What do you think linesmen and umpires are for?
What they should be for & what they actually do are two totally different issues
We will have to agree to differ on this one
We will, though I will say the umpire DID bring it to Bannon's attention. It was Bannon's decision that was crazy.
FW I cant remember who it was, but I am not on for lying down unless is necessary. Nothing to to with the Hughes incident but in my opinion a box to the guts is more likely to floor you than one to the head, would that not be right? You'd more than likely be winded.
Not sure if Miskella would have been punished, probably not to be honest. If Miskella played outside the rules he should be punished. A box is a box and whether a man goes down or remains on his feet, should be treated as such - red card.
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 28, 2009, 09:27:11 AM
A box is a box and whether a man goes down or remains on his feet, should be treated as such - red card.
But that is the point we are trying to make
If a man doesnt go down the guy who done it wont be punished, end of story
How else is the man who done it going to get what he deserves if the referee's attention isnt drawn to it?
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 28, 2009, 09:06:42 AM
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 28, 2009, 08:57:02 AM
Quote from: BennyHarp on August 27, 2009, 06:34:43 PM
If someone punches you in the head playing football you have two options in my opinion - you punch him back and risk getting sent off yourself, or you go down to draw the refs attention to the incident (which is why mcguigan went down) and increase the chances of getting the dirty hoor who hit you sent off - which is exactly what he deserves! In the context of this match mcguigan took the correct action! If it was a local club reserve game - i'd have hit him back!
What would you have done sidelinekick? Stay on your feet, then what?
So Aidan O'Mahony was right to collapse when he got touched against Cork, Miskella should have collapsed when McGuigan elbowed him also and any time any player suffers any contact on the pitch he should fall over straight away to get the free
DFS are you being serious here or sarcastic?
FB
Let me ask you this:
Someone hit Chrissy McKaigue in the first round of the Ulster Championship, it wasn't much of a box, but a box nonetheless. Was he right to fall to the ground? Because from memory there was outrage at his diving and play acting to get a man sent off, something I agreed had no place in our game.
McKaigue was told to get up.
Chances are if you throw a box you will be caught at that level, which Miskella was (baffling as to how he stayed on), but I have yet to see a game descend in to anarchy because someone didnt lie down.
Was being totally sarcastic
Quote from: full back on August 28, 2009, 09:31:09 AM
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 28, 2009, 09:27:11 AM
A box is a box and whether a man goes down or remains on his feet, should be treated as such - red card.
But that is the point we are trying to make
If a man doesnt go down the guy who done it wont be punished, end of story
How else is the man who done it going to get what he deserves if the referee's attention isnt drawn to it?
It's not any player's job to see that another player gets what he deserves, never mind, as is more often intended, what he doesn't deserve. Neither is it a player's job to draw the referee's attention to anything. That's not a credible defence of diving and feigning. We all know the reason players dive and feign and it's not to assist in efficient officiating.
I think I've just invented a new tongue-twister.
Not getting involved anymore
Hardy is WUM & SK is being awkward
Quote from: hardstation on August 28, 2009, 12:04:21 AM
Quote from: muppet on August 27, 2009, 11:41:24 PM
Quote from: hardstation on August 27, 2009, 11:33:11 PM
Quote from: muppet on August 27, 2009, 11:32:36 PM
Quote from: hardstation on August 27, 2009, 11:30:21 PM
Let him play the final, I have no issue with that (in a feck it, he got away with it way). If they win, he should hand his medal back as he doesn't deserve it.*
However, this has set a precedent and next year will be interesting. Video evidence is gone after this.
*That was just a joke for Sidelinekick.
Am I correct in saying video evidence can only be used in instances where the officials took no action?
No. That rule is long gone.
Operational Principles
(1) A committee or Council in Charge may use video evidence to substantiate/complement/clarify what is contained in a Referees Report.
(2) A Committee or Council in Charge or Investigating Committee may use video evidence to formulate and prefer charges in relation to alleged offences not contained in a Referee's Report.
(3) Where a member or unit requests permission to use video evidence in any proceedings, the member or unit shall make such request in writing to the Committee or Council in Charge in advance of the date of hearing, stating the reason(s) for such request and specifying the source of the video evidence.
The Subcommittee further recommends that where the Games' Administration
Committee of the Central Council proposes to use video evidence to determine
whether a charge should be initiated against a member or unit, it shall appoint a
Subcommittee from within its membership to view the video and establish whether a
prima facie case exists. The Subcommittee shall report its findings to the parent
Committee and take no further part in the disciplinary process."
http://www.sportsdra.ie/documents/dra42005final.pdf (http://www.sportsdra.ie/documents/dra42005final.pdf)
Point 1 then.
(1) A committee or Council in Charge may use video evidence to substantiate/complement/clarify what is contained in a Referees Report.
That is very limiting if the referee has taken action as he had in this case with the yellow card.
My read of that (just my opinion) is they could merely add to the referees report and not overturn his action. Frank Murphy would have a field day if they upgraded to red.
Quote from: full back on August 28, 2009, 09:49:35 AM
Not getting involved anymore
Hardy is WUM & SK is being awkward
Taking your ball and going home? :P
The only place for divers is in a swimming pool!
**Knock knock knock**
"Hello Mrs Back, is Full coming out to play?"
"No dear he's not in the mood."
Quote from: full back on August 28, 2009, 09:31:09 AM
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 28, 2009, 09:27:11 AM
A box is a box and whether a man goes down or remains on his feet, should be treated as such - red card.
But that is the point we are trying to make
If a man doesnt go down the guy who done it wont be punished, end of story
How else is the man who done it going to get what he deserves if the referee's attention isnt drawn to it?
In the 1990 all-ireland Colm O'Neill gave Mick Lyons a nice clip on the jaw.
Mick turned and went back into position.
Ref did his job and sent O'Neill off without a player losing respect by rolling on the floor.
As mentioned previously in the thread a ref can't just presume a player has been hit because he is on the ground.
Imagine if a player A ran at player B in an all-ireland final.
When player B raises his hands to fend off A, player A could (if he had a lack of respect for himself and his opponent) collapse to the ground clutching his face. Imagine how tainted our game and player A's first all-ireland would be if the ref bought into this sham and sent player B off. :o
Quote from: timmykelleher on August 28, 2009, 10:41:26 AM
Quote from: full back on August 28, 2009, 09:31:09 AM
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 28, 2009, 09:27:11 AM
A box is a box and whether a man goes down or remains on his feet, should be treated as such - red card.
But that is the point we are trying to make
If a man doesnt go down the guy who done it wont be punished, end of story
How else is the man who done it going to get what he deserves if the referee's attention isnt drawn to it?
In the 1990 all-ireland Colm O'Neill gave Mick Lyons a nice clip on the jaw.
Mick turned and went back into position.
Ref did his job and sent O'Neill off without a player losing respect by rolling on the floor.
As mentioned previously in the thread a ref can't just presume a player has been hit because he is on the ground.
Imagine if a player A ran at player B in an all-ireland final.
When player B raises his hands to fend off A, player A could (if he had a lack of respect for himself and his opponent) collapse to the ground clutching his face. Imagine how tainted our game and player A's first all-ireland would be if the ref bought into this sham and sent player B off. :o
:D :D
[quote author=timmykelleher link=topic=13516.msg631174#msg631174
In the 1990 all-ireland Colm O'Neill gave Mick Lyons a nice clip on the jaw.
Mick turned and went back into position.
Ref did his job and sent O'Neill off without a player losing respect by rolling on the floor.
[/quote]
That is the problem, the ref wont do his job!!!!
He did do his job ???
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 28, 2009, 10:48:21 AM
He did do his job ???
OH f**king HELL, YOU ARE GOING TO GET ME LOCKED UP
The referee didnt do his job last Sunday
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 23, 2009, 05:40:05 PM
Quote from: JMohan on August 23, 2009, 05:32:52 PM
Quote from: DUBSFORSAM1 on August 23, 2009, 05:00:52 PM
Can anyone honestly say they are in anyway surprised to see Tyrone diving and cheating???
Wise up
Bitterness doesn't suit you
So you can't say that it is a surprise yourself...
Suppose it makes a change from the Dubs choking!!
Quote from: full back on August 28, 2009, 10:49:40 AM
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 28, 2009, 10:48:21 AM
He did do his job ???
OH f**king HELL, YOU ARE GOING TO GET ME LOCKED UP
The referee didnt do his job last Sunday
yeah but the incident you quoted, the ref DID do his job, so thats 1-1.
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 28, 2009, 11:04:05 AM
Quote from: full back on August 28, 2009, 10:49:40 AM
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 28, 2009, 10:48:21 AM
He did do his job ???
OH f**king HELL, YOU ARE GOING TO GET ME LOCKED UP
The referee didnt do his job last Sunday
yeah but the incident you quoted, the ref DID do his job, so thats 1-1.
Give me that f**king ball......I'm off
I dont give a flying fcuk about the incident nearly 20 years ago where the ref done his job
:D I'll admit I was just taking the piss with that last comment. Also picked you up wrong in your last post before that.
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 28, 2009, 11:17:39 AM
:D I'll admit I was just taking the piss with that last comment. Also picked you up wrong in your last post before that.
I'm sorry for taking the piss
To be honest you were correct all along and I was just acting like an immature imbecile
Apology accepted
Good lad
One of the biggest problems in our games now is the guy who winds up an opponent by verbal shit talking and sly digs hoping his opponent lashes out so he can hit the ground as if blindsided by Tyson. It is a plague on our games and should be stamped out, the correct action from Bannon should have been to book both of them, one for a minor strike and one for play acting. The problem is, as this thread highlights, is that when one of our own (insert whatever your own county is) does it most people never accept their own players liability and instead become over night experts on the rule book and quote precedents that suit them but ignore ones that don't.
Nobody wants to see lads getting their jaw broken off the ball but neither do we want to see lads holding their faces and doctors 'checking them' for injury when everyone knows there was minimal contact.
Quote from: Zulu on August 28, 2009, 11:27:53 AM
One of the biggest problems in our games now is the guy who winds up an opponent by verbal shit talking and sly digs hoping his opponent lashes out so he can hit the ground as if blindsided by Tyson. It is a plague on our games and should be stamped out, the correct action from Bannon should have been to book both of them, one for a minor strike and one for play acting. The problem is, as this thread highlights, is that when one of our own (insert whatever your own county is) does it most people never accept their own players liability and instead become over night experts on the rule book and quote precedents that suit them but ignore ones that don't.
Nobody wants to see lads getting their jaw broken off the ball but neither do we want to see lads holding their faces and doctors 'checking them' for injury when everyone knows there was minimal contact.
Agreed, Brolly mentioned it a few weeks ago that a certain team were, as he put it, absolute masters of the dark arts.
Quote from: Zulu on August 28, 2009, 11:27:53 AM
the correct action from Bannon should have been to book both of them, one for a minor strike and one for play acting.
:D :D :D :D :D :D
Quote from: Zulu on August 28, 2009, 11:27:53 AM
One of the biggest problems in our games now is the guy who winds up an opponent by verbal shit talking and sly digs hoping his opponent lashes out so he can hit the ground as if blindsided by Tyson. It is a plague on our games and should be stamped out, the correct action from Bannon should have been to book both of them, one for a minor strike and one for play acting. The problem is, as this thread highlights, is that when one of our own (insert whatever your own county is) does it most people never accept their own players liability and instead become over night experts on the rule book and quote precedents that suit them but ignore ones that don't.
Nobody wants to see lads getting their jaw broken off the ball but neither do we want to see lads holding their faces and doctors 'checking them' for injury when everyone knows there was minimal contact.
what exactly is a minor strike? (Q the Arthur Scargel jokes)
what Miskella did ,w as a red card offense, end of story.
I agree with you that alot of these incidents are started with verbal provocation but unless the referee actually hears it, what can he do?
;D ;D ;D ;D
Minor Strike, never knew there was such a thing as a minor strike!!!
Quote from: full back on August 28, 2009, 11:19:21 AM
Quote from: SidelineKick on August 28, 2009, 11:17:39 AM
:D I'll admit I was just taking the piss with that last comment. Also picked you up wrong in your last post before that.
I'm sorry for taking the piss
To be honest you were correct all along and I was just acting like an immature imbecile
Apology accepted
Good lad
:D ya bollix, I started reading that thinking "Jesus did I write that?"
Then I seen the last line :D
QuoteThe problem is, as this thread highlights, is that when one of our own (insert whatever your own county is) does it most people never accept their own players liability and instead become over night experts on the rule book and quote precedents that suit them but ignore ones that don't./quote]
What evidence do I have to support my claim, I give exhibit 1 from FB..
Quotehttp://gaaboard.com/board/Smileys/default/cheesy.gif
and exhibit 2 from Final Whistle
Quote
Minor Strike, never knew there was such a thing as a minor strike!!!/quote]
Quote from: Zulu on August 28, 2009, 11:27:53 AM
One of the biggest problems in our games now is the guy who winds up an opponent by verbal shit talking and sly digs hoping his opponent lashes out so he can hit the ground as if blindsided by Tyson. It is a plague on our games and should be stamped out, the correct action from Bannon should have been to book both of them, one for a minor strike and one for play acting. The problem is, as this thread highlights, is that when one of our own (insert whatever your own county is) does it most people never accept their own players liability and instead become over night experts on the rule book and quote precedents that suit them but ignore ones that don't.
Nobody wants to see lads getting their jaw broken off the ball but neither do we want to see lads holding their faces and doctors 'checking them' for injury when everyone knows there was minimal contact.
But then you've got to look at what precedes the "sly digs" Usually shirt pulling and such which also needs stamped out. How often do you see a forward getting his shirt pulled and he throws a elbow back to shake of the defender. Happens 10 times a game. Not enough refs are big enough to blow for a foul down the pitch were a forward is being held illegally even when it's bloody obvious!!
Quote from: full back on August 27, 2009, 05:31:00 PM
Its not often a forward starts on a defender to be fair
Maybe not to intimidate or injure but to goad the opposing player into getting booked or sent off? Happens often enough in my experience...
The classic is feigned offense at some close marking followed by some handbag wrestling and appeals to umpires while the referee is at the other end of the field. Usually ends in both players getting booked which is a result for the forward >:(