Saturday, February 8
AIB GAA Hurling All Ireland Senior Club Championship Semi-Finals
Mount Leinster Rangers (Carlow) v Loughgiel Shamrocks (Antrim), Páirc Esler, Newry, 3pm
Portumna (Galway) v Na Piarsaigh (Limerick), Semple Stadium, Thurles, 5pm
Saturday, February 15
AIB GAA Football All Ireland Senior Club Championship Semi-Finals
Castlebar Mitchels (Mayo) v Dr Crokes (Kerry), O'Moore Park, Portlaoise, 3pm
St. Vincents (Dublin) v Ballinderry (Derry), Páirc Esler, Newry, 5pm
All four games will be shown on TG4.
Quote from: riptorn on January 14, 2014, 03:47:13 PM
All four games will be shown on TG4.
Can't be bad to that.
(http://i39.tinypic.com/2cy1nxf.jpg)
Always a highlight a highlight of the GAA calendar. Particularly looking forward to the Mitchels and Crokes game.
Quote from: riptorn on January 14, 2014, 03:54:28 PM
(http://i39.tinypic.com/2cy1nxf.jpg)
Its only 2 hours on good roads the whole way.
Great to see Newry getting some big games, it is well positioned and has good road to the town, as has been said before.
Quote from: riptorn on January 14, 2014, 03:54:28 PM
(http://i39.tinypic.com/2cy1nxf.jpg)
Newry??????
Yes, it's a major Irish town equidistant between Loughgiel and Borris.
Quote from: Feckitt on January 14, 2014, 04:45:26 PM
Quote from: riptorn on January 14, 2014, 03:54:28 PM
(http://i39.tinypic.com/2cy1nxf.jpg)
Newry??????
Yes, it's a major Irish town equidistant between Loughgiel and Borris.
Carlow?????
2014
Mitchels v Vincents Club All-Ireland Final
Mayo v Dublin NFL Final
Mayo v Dublin All-Ireland Football Final
What odds?
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on January 14, 2014, 05:16:08 PM
2014
Mitchels v Vincents Club All-Ireland Final
Mayo v Dublin NFL Final
Mayo v Dublin All-Ireland Football Final
What odds?
And what odds on all the Mayo teams to lose those All Ireland finals?
Quote from: Captain Obvious on January 14, 2014, 05:33:09 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on January 14, 2014, 05:16:08 PM
2014
Mitchels v Vincents Club All-Ireland Final
Mayo v Dublin NFL Final
Mayo v Dublin All-Ireland Football Final
What odds?
And what odds on all the Mayo teams to lose those All Ireland finals?
Big and bigger.
QuoteGreat to see Newry getting some big games, it is well positioned and has good road to the town, as has been said before.
Great to see Newry getting some big games, it is well positioned and has good road to
the West of the town, as has been said before.
Fixed that for you.
But as you'd drive to this road west of the town in an hour from St Vincent's, it is suitable enough, only another 45 mins to Páirc Esler.
Intermediate football semi finals Sunday January 26th
2PM - Kiltane (Mayo) v Clyda Rovers (Cork) - Ballinasloe
2pm - Geraldines (Louth) v Truagh (Monaghan)- Crossmaglen
Junior football semi finals Sunday January 26th
2pm - Two Mile House (Kildare) v Emyvale (Monaghan) - Glennon Brothers Pearse Park
245pm - Keel (Kerry) v Fuerty (Roscommon) - Gaelic Grounds, Limerick
Intermediate hurling semi finals Sunday January 26th
1pm - Kilnadeema-Leitrim (Galway) v Youghal (Cork) - Gaelic Grounds, Limerick
2pm - Rower Inistioge (Kilkenny) v Clooney Gaels (Antrim) - Páirc Tailteann
Junior hurling semi finals Sunday January 26th
12.00 - Fullen Gaels (Manchester) v Creggan Kickhams (Antrim) - Páirc Esler, Newry
2pm - Calry/St Joseph's (Sligo) v Ballysaggart (Waterford) - O Connor Park, Tullamore
--------------------------------
Connacht clubs won half of the 6 All Irelands in 2013 will be interesting to see how they fare this year.
Quote from: Feckitt on January 14, 2014, 04:45:26 PM
Quote from: riptorn on January 14, 2014, 03:54:28 PM
(http://i39.tinypic.com/2cy1nxf.jpg)
Newry??????
Yes, it's a major Irish town equidistant between Loughgiel and Borris.
I would have thought Newry would have been more likely to tweet Carlow???
Superb win for Fuerty against the Kerry & Munster champions Keel today well done lads, Croker next Sunday v Two Mile House of Kildare shame these games are fixed the same day as NFL games.
Quote from: ross4life on February 01, 2014, 05:45:35 PM
Superb win for Fuerty against the Kerry & Munster champions Keel today well done lads, Croker next Sunday v Two Mile House of Kildare shame these games are fixed the same day as NFL games.
Great stuff from Fuerty, and Glavey's had them nearly finished off in the Roscommon final too. Good times for Roscommon club football. Go and win 'er, lads.
Rhus, give us Andy, Cian Hanley and Evan Regan back and we'll teach ye how to beat Kerry when it matters.
Quote from: Syferus on February 01, 2014, 05:51:00 PM
Quote from: ross4life on February 01, 2014, 05:45:35 PM
Superb win for Fuerty against the Kerry & Munster champions Keel today well done lads, Croker next Sunday v Two Mile House of Kildare shame these games are fixed the same day as NFL games.
Great stuff from Fuerty, and Glavey's had them nearly finished off in the Roscommon final too. Good times for Roscommon club football. Go and win 'er, lads.
Rhus, give us Andy, Cian Hanley and Evan Regan back and we'll teach ye how to beat Kerry when it matters.
When did Roscommon beat Kerry when it matters?
Quote from: Tubberman on February 01, 2014, 06:02:52 PM
Quote from: Syferus on February 01, 2014, 05:51:00 PM
Quote from: ross4life on February 01, 2014, 05:45:35 PM
Superb win for Fuerty against the Kerry & Munster champions Keel today well done lads, Croker next Sunday v Two Mile House of Kildare shame these games are fixed the same day as NFL games.
Great stuff from Fuerty, and Glavey's had them nearly finished off in the Roscommon final too. Good times for Roscommon club football. Go and win 'er, lads.
Rhus, give us Andy, Cian Hanley and Evan Regan back and we'll teach ye how to beat Kerry when it matters.
When did Roscommon beat Kerry when it matters?
Oh ye of little knowledge 8)
Quote from: Syferus on February 01, 2014, 06:06:35 PM
Quote from: Tubberman on February 01, 2014, 06:02:52 PM
Quote from: Syferus on February 01, 2014, 05:51:00 PM
Quote from: ross4life on February 01, 2014, 05:45:35 PM
Superb win for Fuerty against the Kerry & Munster champions Keel today well done lads, Croker next Sunday v Two Mile House of Kildare shame these games are fixed the same day as NFL games.
Great stuff from Fuerty, and Glavey's had them nearly finished off in the Roscommon final too. Good times for Roscommon club football. Go and win 'er, lads.
Rhus, give us Andy, Cian Hanley and Evan Regan back and we'll teach ye how to beat Kerry when it matters.
When did Roscommon beat Kerry when it matters?
Oh ye of little knowledge 8)
As I thought....
Quote from: Tubberman on February 01, 2014, 06:02:52 PM
When did Roscommon beat Kerry when it matters?
We have beaten Kerry in All Ireland finals at Junior,Minor,U-21 and Senior level how many counties of our size/pick can say that?
Evan Regan a Rossie?
Quote from: Farrandeelin on February 01, 2014, 09:19:30 PM
Evan Regan a Rossie?
The ould dah is a Ros Gaels man. If ye can claim poor Andy and Cian we can surely claim young Evan ;)
He's qualified to play in primrose and blue, after all..
Quote from: Syferus on February 01, 2014, 09:33:46 PM
Quote from: Farrandeelin on February 01, 2014, 09:19:30 PM
Evan Regan a Rossie?
The ould dah is a Ros Gaels man. If ye can claim poor Andy and Cian we can surely claim young Evan ;)
He's qualified to play in primrose and blue, after all..
So the Earleys are from Mayo then?
Quote from: muppet on February 01, 2014, 09:55:56 PM
Quote from: Syferus on February 01, 2014, 09:33:46 PM
Quote from: Farrandeelin on February 01, 2014, 09:19:30 PM
Evan Regan a Rossie?
The ould dah is a Ros Gaels man. If ye can claim poor Andy and Cian we can surely claim young Evan ;)
He's qualified to play in primrose and blue, after all..
Sure Paul was born after Peadar and Kitty moved to Gorthaganny! Try to keep up, Muppet!
So the Earleys are from Mayo then?
Quote from: Syferus on February 01, 2014, 09:33:46 PM
Quote from: Farrandeelin on February 01, 2014, 09:19:30 PM
Evan Regan a Rossie?
The ould dah is a Ros Gaels man. If ye can claim poor Andy and Cian we can surely claim young Evan ;)
He's qualified to play in primrose and blue, after all..
oh Jeez its time for a large one
Quote from: sans pessimism on February 01, 2014, 10:18:02 PM
Quote from: Syferus on February 01, 2014, 09:33:46 PM
Quote from: Farrandeelin on February 01, 2014, 09:19:30 PM
Evan Regan a Rossie?
The ould dah is a Ros Gaels man. If ye can claim poor Andy and Cian we can surely claim young Evan ;)
He's qualified to play in primrose and blue, after all..
oh Jeez its time for a large one
Sure he won't answer Jamesy's calls but did anyone ask him if he was taking Johnny Evans'? :-X
Quote from: ross4life on February 01, 2014, 07:38:14 PM
Quote from: Tubberman on February 01, 2014, 06:02:52 PM
When did Roscommon beat Kerry when it matters?
We have beaten Kerry in All Ireland finals at Junior,Minor,U-21 and Senior level how many counties of our size/pick can say that?
Galway and ...???
Quote from: Rossfan on February 01, 2014, 10:31:21 PM
Quote from: ross4life on February 01, 2014, 07:38:14 PM
Quote from: Tubberman on February 01, 2014, 06:02:52 PM
When did Roscommon beat Kerry when it matters?
We have beaten Kerry in All Ireland finals at Junior,Minor,U-21 and Senior level how many counties of our size/pick can say that?
Galway and ...???
Crunched de numbers and only we have the full set. Galway have never beaten Kerry in an AI junior final, indeed in their four AI junior title wins they've never beaten a team from Ireland in the final. They lost to Kerry in the 1994 final.
Galway and Meath are the closest runners-up, having beat Kerry at Minor, U21 and Senior. Luckily enough Meath's only
Minor U21 title came against Kerry in 1993.
Incorrect.
Quote from: Jinxy on February 01, 2014, 11:47:16 PM
Incorrect.
On which? I was going on Wikipedia (not the greatest of sources but there really is a desperate need for a centralised records database) so I'm open to correction.
Edit: Whoops, it was at U21 Meath beat Kerry in the AI final, their only victory in
that grade, not minor.
A great win for Castlebar Mitchels against Dr Crokes. Up the West.
Fancies for the Finals?
Have the bookies got it right? Portumna are favorites and rightly so, beat a fancied Limerick (Na Piarsaigh) team and meeting a team that have upset the odds in beating all in Leinster and the previous All Ireland Champions. Can MLR keep it going?
St Vincents will fancy themselves also no doubt (the Dubs always do) but Castlebar have looked very impressive so far, I can see this going to a replay won't be much in it.
I'm going for Portumna (with the handicap) and a draw in the other game for an interest
On a tight pitch I'd give MLR a chance.
Portumna will run the legs off them.
Quote from: Jinxy on March 12, 2014, 05:18:07 PM
On a tight pitch I'd give MLR a chance.
Portumna will run the legs off them.
The drier sod will suit Portumna, but I was very impressed with the two MLR corner forwards who have a bit of pace and know where the posts are. Getting the ball into them will be the stumbling block.
Portumna by 7 which isn't a stuffing in hurling.
AI club finals imo are usually won by the most rounded teams with the better "unsung" players (if that makes any sense).
MLR have some fighting spirit and having been written off for the whole season I have a hunch they will win it. They have some seriously good club hurlers.
Castlebar having beaten the AI champions and hot favourites will win the football. If Connolly has one of those days though Vins will be in with a chance.
Quote from: Canalman on March 13, 2014, 10:52:42 AM
AI club finals imo are usually won by the most rounded teams with the better "unsung" players (if that makes any sense).
MLR have some fighting spirit and having been written off for the whole season I have a hunch they will win it. They have some seriously good club hurlers.
Castlebar having beaten the AI champions and hot favourites will win the football. If Connolly has one of those days though Vins will be in with a chance.
Castlebar beat Crokes without the Gooch for a big portion of the game. Thats a massive point. Vincents for me by a few
Quote from: J OGorman on March 13, 2014, 11:02:32 AM
Quote from: Canalman on March 13, 2014, 10:52:42 AM
AI club finals imo are usually won by the most rounded teams with the better "unsung" players (if that makes any sense).
MLR have some fighting spirit and having been written off for the whole season I have a hunch they will win it. They have some seriously good club hurlers.
Castlebar having beaten the AI champions and hot favourites will win the football. If Connolly has one of those days though Vins will be in with a chance.
Castlebar beat Crokes without the Gooch for a big portion of the game. Thats a massive point. Vincents for me by a few
I saw Vincents in both County finals. Hung in by fingernails in the 1st half of the replay, if another long ball had been sent into Dean Rock it could have been over before half time. Fennell is a very useful club player in the middle and well,what can you say about Connolly....awesome at times.
I threw a few bob on Mitchels at 22/1 to win AI after seeing them dispose of my own club in the Mayo Championship. The strength in dept is unreal, 1-30 or very close to it has had county experience at some age grade.
Best of luck to Castlebar Mitchels later on. It should be a great game.
Up Portumna, up Mitchells. Another Connacht double please.
Quote from: Syferus on March 17, 2014, 01:43:35 PM
Up Portumna, up Mitchells. Another Connacht double please.
Connacht doubles are fabliss.
1988 was desperate. Athenry and Clann both hammered
Things got better afterwards
Portuma are just too sharp i think. Mlr are quite physical and kelly penalising them too much. Possibly giving joe canning too much protection.still in it though.
keep us updated, feckin RTE player is blocked and so is access to proxy sites!!!!
Quote from: johnneycool on March 17, 2014, 02:29:45 PM
keep us updated, feckin RTE player is blocked and so is access to proxy sites!!!!
Can you get Marty and co on the radio?
http://www.rte.ie/radio1/
9-5 halftime to portuma.
Portuma getting their scores that bit easier so far.
10-7 portuma.
Canning went for goal from 20 yards but missed.
Quote from: imtommygunn on March 17, 2014, 02:51:04 PM
10-7 portuma.
Canning went for goal from 20 yards but missed.
The chance to get something the other end after the save was the momentum swing MLR needed to change the script and they didn't even get a shot away.
QuoteCanning went for goal from 20 yards but missed.
Happened me many's the time....
12-7
Ref a bit harsh on mlr.
Ollie canning a wily old bugger.
13-9
Hanging in there but only one winner i would say.
Ref turned a bit.
15-9
Cracks beginning to appear.
One more for the collection. Well done Portumna.
MLR battled gamely but never looked like they could win the game.
19-11
Portuma able to get their scores a good bit easier.some experience /cuteness in that team.
Mlr too many handling errors.
Eoin lynch motm.
Poor game.
As usual the football final will be a much more entertaining contest.
Quote from: Jinxy on March 17, 2014, 03:21:13 PM
Poor game.
As usual the football final will be a much more entertaining contest.
especially with the tight short wearing dubs on display ;)
The weekend of the Tanned One continues.
Hope he mentions how 'seductive' the Vincent's forwards are.
Feeney big loss to castlebar.
Vincents should have a black card too.
Feeneys was a definite black card.
I'm not so sure about the Vincents tackle.
He wasn't 'dragged' down as far as I'm concerned.
F**king hell Richie.
Crazy stuff from Feeney. Can,t have any complaints.
The other one was not a black. Douglas fell and was fouled but was not dragged down.
Still last seasons competition should black cards be in place?
Unbelieavble idiotic from Feeney.
Bonnie's was an attempt to tackle, an attempt to get the ball. Not a black card under the rules.
Castlebar keeper looks good.
Mossy yet to turn up.
Quote from: Captain Obvious on March 17, 2014, 04:03:09 PM
Still last seasons competition should black cards be in place?
This is the 2014 AI Club Championship.
The Barry Moran tactic a waste of time with the type of ball they are playing in to him. Needs ball hanging up there. Not low driven ball.
Castle bar playing well but the ref poor enough - being very harsh on Vincent's
See what I mean ;)
vincents midfield is pathetic
Quote from: lynchbhoy on March 17, 2014, 04:09:27 PM
Castle bar playing well but the ref poor enough - being very harsh on Vincent's
Is he? Can't see it...
About to say Vincents are very wasteful in front of goal and they finally get one in the net.
Quote from: squire_in_navy_slacks on March 17, 2014, 04:10:33 PM
vincents midfield is pathetic
Mitchels' FB line is likewise. Saved only by the grace of poor play by the Vin 14 and good play by the Mitchels keeper.
Quote from: GalwayBayBoy on March 17, 2014, 04:12:03 PM
About to say Vincents are very wasteful in front of goal and they finally get one in the net.
They have created a lot of goal chances. Mainly through connolly. Odds are they'll get one eventually.
Vincents could have had 5 goals by now. Look like getting one every time they attack. Getting enough possession is the problem for them.
In this non cantact sport now a team has to score goals to win matches.
Mitchel 's will need to create a couple of goals themselves. Better team overall in first half.
Yeah, Mitchels better side in the first half. Need to shore up full back line. This game reminds me of the AI final last September!
Quote from: Syferus on March 17, 2014, 04:06:06 PM
Quote from: Captain Obvious on March 17, 2014, 04:03:09 PM
Still last seasons competition should black cards be in place?
This is the 2014 AI Club Championship.
2013/14 All Ireland club championship. When the competition started it had no black cards. Good quality game the Castlebar goal keeping might have pulled off some match winning saves. Vincents needs a improvement from Tomás Quinn if they are to win this game.
Vincent's will be the happier at half time. Mitchels have done well without Ritchie. Black card for infringement that far out the field is cruel. Anyay, If there is only a point or two with five minutes to go then Mitchels will win. They have finished well in all games.
some selfish players on both sides
Vincents beating the castlebar defense too easily. Connolly a cut above the rest.
Vincents look to have found their A game?
Nos 10 and 7 very good for castlebar.
Brennan and fennel poor enough.
Game on...
Castlebar rebound.
Slice of luck for Castlebar. Point effort off the post drops straight into Kirby's hands.
That lucky Castlebar goal could be the turning point
And a handy bounce for Vincents now is palmed in by Connolly.
get off you pile of shite fennell
Great Game!
Connolly can be a bit hit and miss playing for the Dubs but he's different class at club level.
Vincents blow yet another goal chance. Castlebar keeper having a stormer.
Vincents have missed how many goal chances now?
Connolly is the difference really. Castlebar tiring badly here.
In fairness Connolly having a great game, fine goal by him.
Magic display by Connolly!
How many times has castlebar kicked the ball????????
Easy for st.vincents to defend.
Quote from: Captain Obvious on March 17, 2014, 04:55:01 PM
In fairness Connolly having a great game, fine goal by him.
Fantastic. Always seems to have a few extra seconds on the ball. Makes it look easy. Best player today.
Quote from: CD on March 17, 2014, 04:58:07 PM
Quote from: Captain Obvious on March 17, 2014, 04:55:01 PM
In fairness Connolly having a great game, fine goal by him.
Fantastic. Always seems to have a few extra seconds on the ball. Makes it look easy. Best player today.
best forward in ireland on that display
Best side won well done to St Vincents.
Well done Vincents! Well done also to Mitchels. They have had a great year. Coming from nowhere, really!
Quote from: theticklemister on March 17, 2014, 05:01:26 PM
Quote from: CD on March 17, 2014, 04:58:07 PM
Quote from: Captain Obvious on March 17, 2014, 04:55:01 PM
In fairness Connolly having a great game, fine goal by him.
Fantastic. Always seems to have a few extra seconds on the ball. Makes it look easy. Best player today.
best forward in ireland on that display
He won t be marking Eoghan Reilly playing for the county.
How did Holmes not put Cuniffe on him. Very innocent stuff from Mitchels. Turned into a bit of a trimming.
Still they should improve. Should win county again anyway.
But they ll need to wise up.
Quote from: CD on March 17, 2014, 04:58:07 PM
Quote from: Captain Obvious on March 17, 2014, 04:55:01 PM
In fairness Connolly having a great game, fine goal by him.
Fantastic. Always seems to have a few extra seconds on the ball. Makes it look easy. Best player today.
Outstanding second half from him, as they say, he was in the zone
Agree moy, how in Christ's holy name did Holmes leave O'Reilly on Connolly is totally beyond me. Managerial genius??? Pffh.
Incredible stuff by Connolly. Richie wouldn't have changed the result.
Fantastic display by Connolly. Easiest MOTM pick ever in a club final
Boyfriends ??????????????????// WTF Ger ?????????
Quote from: Farrandeelin on March 17, 2014, 05:10:16 PM
Agree moy, how in Christ's holy name did Holmes leave O'Reilly on Connolly is totally beyond me. Managerial genius??? Pffh.
And a campaign started already at home to replace Horan with this geezer. Jesus wept! you couldn t make it up.
Richie Feeney didn t help matters either. He could have done a job at the back and would def have added something going forward.
Anyway congrats to St. Vincents. They could have scored goals every time they went down the field.
Quote from: Throw ball on March 17, 2014, 05:15:18 PM
Fantastic display by Connolly. Easiest MOTM pick ever in a club final
Since Ciarán McDonald 2001!
St Vincents were on a different planet today with Connolly free to do whatever his undoubted talent permitted him to do.
He seemed to have so much time on the ball and to do with it whatever he wanted. He scored 2-5 and set up most of the rest. He passed a ball over for the full forward to palm into the net. I wouldn't be too sore on Castlebar management for affording Connolly the freedom of the park. Sometimes you just have to take your hat off to players like Connolly who when they hit a day like he did today, there was no stopping him.
Quote from: moysider on March 17, 2014, 05:07:59 PM
Quote from: theticklemister on March 17, 2014, 05:01:26 PM
Quote from: CD on March 17, 2014, 04:58:07 PM
Quote from: Captain Obvious on March 17, 2014, 04:55:01 PM
In fairness Connolly having a great game, fine goal by him.
Fantastic. Always seems to have a few extra seconds on the ball. Makes it look easy. Best player today.
best forward in ireland on that display
He won t be marking Eoghan Reilly playing for the county.
How did Holmes not put Cuniffe on him. Very innocent stuff from Mitchels. Turned into a bit of a trimming.
Still they should improve. Should win county again anyway.
But they ll need to wise up.
Yes Connolly has great joy against loose marking defenders
well done st vincents. well deserved. Connolly was different class.
Quality performance from Connolly, he has great vision too. Hard luck to Castlebar
That was an enjoyable game, well done to Vincents.
Though that Castlebar goalie might have given the best display in a final by a bearded goalie since Paddy Cullen.
Quote from: moysider on March 17, 2014, 05:15:40 PM
Quote from: Farrandeelin on March 17, 2014, 05:10:16 PM
Agree moy, how in Christ's holy name did Holmes leave O'Reilly on Connolly is totally beyond me. Managerial genius??? Pffh.
And a campaign started already at home to replace Horan with this geezer. Jesus wept! you couldn t make it up.
Richie Feeney didn t help matters either. He could have done a job at the back and would def have added something going forward.
Anyway congrats to St. Vincents. They could have scored goals every time they went down the field.
I reckon Holmes wanted to pass on the lesson that he had learned to Eoghan O'Reilly; he experienced at first hand from running around after Maurice Fitzgerald what it's like to be stuck marking a class player for a whole game. Just shows you how well he learned his management craft from Maughan. Mayo God help us, if he is our next county manager.
Well done to Vincents, great performance today.
On a positive note for Mayo, Tom Cunniffe, Barry Moran and young Patrick Durcan will be welcome additions to the Mayo senior set up. I was really impressed with Durcan today. He was class for Mayo minors a couple of seasons back and he is really starting to take it to the next level.
Quote from: Main Street on March 17, 2014, 05:47:38 PM
That was an enjoyable game, well done to Vincents.
Though that Castlebar goalie might have given the best display in a final by a bearded goalie since Paddy Cullen.
Three certain goals he saved, if it was for Connolly given the freedom of the park he would have won MOTM.
Congrats to St Vincents.
To the Mayo posters
Ref Eoghan O'Reilly
Was there any options available to Holmes, or was he the only man Castlebar had that could possibly do the job.
It's OK to have a go at Holmes, but I'm interested in the options he had beside putting someone else on him to get destroyed
Tom Cuniffe has the pace.
Richie Feeney couldn t have done any worse. His defense was left far too exposed. Needed an extra defender and needed to kick earlier ball on top of Barry Moran when they played him inside.
Quote from: CSC on March 17, 2014, 06:14:22 PM
To the Mayo posters
Ref Eoghan O'Reilly
Was there any options available to Holmes, or was he the only man Castlebar had that could possibly do the job.
It's OK to have a go at Holmes, but I'm interested in the options he had beside putting someone else on him to get destroyed
My guess is that they would have moved Feeney onto Moran and given Connolly to Cuniffe, but that's a mute point at this juncture
Quote from: moysider on March 17, 2014, 06:47:59 PM
Tom Cuniffe has the pace.
Richie Feeney couldn t have done any worse. His defense was left far too exposed. Needed an extra defender and needed to kick earlier ball on top of Barry Moran when they played him inside.
Then Quinn would have run amok. Cunniffe did really well today. Castlebar's day ended when Feeney got the line.
We were the better team because we had Connolly and Castlebar didn't he was the difference. It was a thankless task for a club player to mark Connolly. You needed a county player like Feeney on him.
Heart goes out to Castlebar. Losing a club final is losing a bride at the altar. Hope you get back fellas
Quote from: INDIANA on March 17, 2014, 07:01:08 PM
Then Quinn would have run amok. Cunniffe did really well today.
In fairness Quinn was very poor today and it wasn't anything to do with Tom Cunniffe marking him.
Connolly was excellent today. He is a talented player and at that level he's unmarkable on that form. I thought some of Mitchell's forward play was very nervy or unsure of itself. Foostering we'd have called it back in the day. What was the story with the Vincent's lad with the American flag? Is there a yank playing with them?
Quote from: Captain Obvious on March 17, 2014, 07:21:08 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on March 17, 2014, 07:01:08 PM
Then Quinn would have run amok. Cunniffe did really well today.
In fairness Quinn was very poor today and it wasn't anything to do with Tom Cunniffe marking him.
Quinn looked a bit out of sorts alright. He seems to be the sort of player that goes according to how his first few dead balls go.
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 17, 2014, 07:26:21 PM
Connolly was excellent today. He is a talented player and at that level he's unmarkable on that form. I thought some of Mitchell's forward play was very nervy or unsure of itself. Foostering we'd have called it back in the day. What was the story with the Vincent's lad with the American flag? Is there a yank playing with them?
Castlebar don t have any county standard forwards (Barry a midfielder and Richie a utility player). Once it became a shoot out there was only going to be one winner.
Quote from: moysider on March 17, 2014, 07:36:56 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 17, 2014, 07:26:21 PM
Connolly was excellent today. He is a talented player and at that level he's unmarkable on that form. I thought some of Mitchell's forward play was very nervy or unsure of itself. Foostering we'd have called it back in the day. What was the story with the Vincent's lad with the American flag? Is there a yank playing with them?
Castlebar don t have any county standard forwards (Barry a midfielder and Richie a utility player). Once it became a shoot out there was only going to be one winner.
Tom King had been playing well but he kicked his first two frees with zero conviction and the second one - a gimme - wasn't even converted. Like a lot of Castlebar plays this year the Mitchels had a lot of ball blocked or turned over because the player in possession wasn't quick enough in using the ball.
Kirby has a taste for goal.
I posted when I walked out of Croke Park but my signal failed and post disappeared. I was too emotionally drained to retry at the time. Today Connally, Cunniffe and Naughton lit up Croke Park. Richie was a huge loss. We had no midfield on the first half. The goals killed us, the were too easy and Naughton did everything a man could do.I am gutted, leaving Croke Park as a Mayoman on A.I. day is something most will never understand not because others don't experience losing but because of the inevitability. Heart broken, but I know we will be back supporting a Mayo team, because that is also our path. Well done Vincents, thank you Castlebar Mitchels Champions of Mayo and Connacht.
Quote from: moysider on March 17, 2014, 07:36:56 PM
Castlebar don t have any county standard forwards (Barry a midfielder and Richie a utility player). Once it became a shoot out there was only going to be one winner.
You don't think Douglas is county standard? i thought he showed well at U21 level for Mayo. I think Castlebars average score per game was around the same as Brigids last year & they had two county standard forwards in Kilbride,Dolan.
Quote from: INDIANA on March 17, 2014, 07:01:08 PM
Heart goes out to Castlebar. Losing a club final is losing a bride at the altar. Hope you get back fellas
Has taken Castlebar 20 years to get back to the AI final though probably only two sides at the moment good enough to topple them in Connacht. Established & well seasoned Brigids team just about bet Ballymun last years AI final it goes to show the shear strength of club football in Dublin at the moment. How would you compare this Vincents side with the last All Ireland winning team?
Connolly is very hot and cold... Today he was hot, and he was awesome, but you just never know which fella will show up!
Well done Vincents, terrific advert for the Dublin club game...
Now it's time to split Vinnys in 2 :-)
I'm going to be controversial here but I genuinely felt extremely sorry for Richie Feeney today. He trained all his life and in particular for the past year and a bit to run out onto Croke Park today and got sent off for stopping the runner after 4 minutes. Yes he shouldn't have committed the foul.
But the referee decided it was a black card and his and ultimately Castlebar's race was run.
The referee then proceeded to ignore at least another ( and I'm bring conservative here ) half a dozen black card offences.
Richie got roaded. The rest got lucky.
Quote from: orangeman on March 17, 2014, 09:22:12 PM
I'm going to be controversial here but I genuinely felt extremely sorry for Richie Feeney today. He trained all his life and in particular for the past year and a bit to run out onto Croke Park today and got sent off for stopping the runner after 4 minutes. Yes he shouldn't have committed the foul.
But the referee decided it was a black card and his and ultimately Castlebar's race was run.
The referee then proceeded to ignore at least another ( and I'm bring conservative here ) half a dozen black card offences.
Richie got roaded. The rest got lucky.
More so when the rule states that a defender is entitled to stay his ground...it's taking a step to left or right or an off the ball check that's a black card...
Feeney's was a black card. The most deliberate third man foul tackle I've seen in ages and a most stupid thing to do for God's sake.
However the total inconsistency even within the same game is a problem.
I read a report on the Derry/Dublin game which said there were so many black card offences unpunished it was a joke.
The black card rule is just plain silly when different refs do their own thing even within the same game.
Feeney was roaded today but everybody else who committed black card offences all got staying on.
A bad rule not fully thought out or considered and passed amidst hysteria at Congress with grown men crying their eyes out when it got passed.
Quote from: orangeman on March 17, 2014, 09:51:14 PM
The black card rule is just plain silly when different refs do their own thing even within the same game.
Feeney was roaded today but everybody else who committed black card offences all got staying on.
A bad rule not fully thought out or considered and passed amidst hysteria at Congress with grown men crying their eyes out when it got passed.
Ah, the black card has turned into the silliest rule. Ruined todays game. Look I know Feeney was silly, but part of what he did was setting out his stall. Jez, it was a couple of minutes into the game, if it was the last play or nearer the opposition goal then you could understand such a rule being used.
Quote from: orangeman on March 17, 2014, 09:22:12 PM
I'm going to be controversial here but I genuinely felt extremely sorry for Richie Feeney today. He trained all his life and in particular for the past year and a bit to run out onto Croke Park today and got sent off for stopping the runner after 4 minutes. Yes he shouldn't have committed the foul.
But the referee decided it was a black card and his and ultimately Castlebar's race was run.
The referee then proceeded to ignore at least another ( and I'm bring conservative here ) half a dozen black card offences.
Richie got roaded. The rest got lucky.
What utter nonsense!
Blaming a ref because YOU don't understand the rules. Feeney was the only player on the pitch who committed a black card offence. The blame for it lies solely with him
Feeneys was right in front of the ref, off the ball. Didn't notice any other incidents as obvious.
Quote from: Hound on March 17, 2014, 10:24:29 PM
Quote from: orangeman on March 17, 2014, 09:22:12 PM
I'm going to be controversial here but I genuinely felt extremely sorry for Richie Feeney today. He trained all his life and in particular for the past year and a bit to run out onto Croke Park today and got sent off for stopping the runner after 4 minutes. Yes he shouldn't have committed the foul.
But the referee decided it was a black card and his and ultimately Castlebar's race was run.
The referee then proceeded to ignore at least another ( and I'm bring conservative here ) half a dozen black card offences.
Richie got roaded. The rest got lucky.
What utter nonsense!
Blaming a ref because YOU don't understand the rules. Feeney was the only player on the pitch who committed a black card offence. The blame for it lies solely with him
Feeney was stupid. But look through the game again and you'll find a few black card offences that went unpunished.
I'm not blaming the ref for anything other than inconsistency. Not a hanging offence and not the first time refs were accused of inconsistency.
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 17, 2014, 07:26:21 PMWhat was the story with the Vincent's lad with the American flag? Is there a yank playing with them?
The Egan lad is from a place called "Sligo". None of us ever heard of it, but he said its the Wild West, so the lads got him the flag specially for the lap of honour!
I would tend to agree with Hound and Rodney Trotter......Feeney definitely deserved his black card. If there were other incidents as obvious, then I missed them too.
Quote from: Hound on March 17, 2014, 10:28:52 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 17, 2014, 07:26:21 PMWhat was the story with the Vincent's lad with the American flag? Is there a yank playing with them?
The Egan lad is from a place called "Sligo". None of us ever heard of it, but he said its the Wild West, so the lads got him the flag specially for the lap of honour!
Nice touch.
Quote from: ballinaman on March 17, 2014, 09:44:51 PM
Quote from: orangeman on March 17, 2014, 09:22:12 PM
I'm going to be controversial here but I genuinely felt extremely sorry for Richie Feeney today. He trained all his life and in particular for the past year and a bit to run out onto Croke Park today and got sent off for stopping the runner after 4 minutes. Yes he shouldn't have committed the foul.
But the referee decided it was a black card and his and ultimately Castlebar's race was run.
The referee then proceeded to ignore at least another ( and I'm bring conservative here ) half a dozen black card offences.
Richie got roaded. The rest got lucky.
More so when the rule states that a defender is entitled to stay his ground...it's taking a step to left or right or an off the ball check that's a black card...
Feeney did not move his legs an inch either way, the card decision was harsh imo.
What could he have done different? just get clattered?
There were a number of cynical dragging fouls made to slow Castlebar's progress in attack in the last 1/4 of the game, which the ref penalised, but no sign of a card. I thought that was the kind of play which the black card was sold to congress on.
Though this shouldn't detract from Vincents one bit, without a doubt they were worthy winners, a wonderful club team on the day when it mattered.
Quote from: orangeman on March 17, 2014, 09:51:14 PM
The black card rule is just plain silly when different refs do their own thing even within the same game.
Listen to yourself for God's sake ::)
If a ref's "do their own thing" ONE Rule is plain silly. ::) ::) ::) ::)
Well done Vincent's.
Gutted for Mitchels and in particular Richie.
Vincents were worthy winners and I'm certainly not blaming the ref for Castlebar losing. Connolly was in unstoppable form today and he beat Castlebar on his own. Rarely do you see such a personal performance and Vincents were very, very worthy winners and it could have been a heavier defeat for the Mayo men.
Rules is rules, lads.
Quote from: Jinxy on March 17, 2014, 10:44:00 PM
Rules is rules, lads.
Except when it comes to 16 year olds seemingly. :)
Quote from: Jinxy on March 17, 2014, 10:44:00 PM
Rules is rules, lads.
Is it not.... rules are rules????
Well done lads - Des Foley would be proud ;D
Quote from: Main Street on March 17, 2014, 10:33:36 PM
Quote from: ballinaman on March 17, 2014, 09:44:51 PM
Quote from: orangeman on March 17, 2014, 09:22:12 PM
I'm going to be controversial here but I genuinely felt extremely sorry for Richie Feeney today. He trained all his life and in particular for the past year and a bit to run out onto Croke Park today and got sent off for stopping the runner after 4 minutes. Yes he shouldn't have committed the foul.
But the referee decided it was a black card and his and ultimately Castlebar's race was run.
The referee then proceeded to ignore at least another ( and I'm bring conservative here ) half a dozen black card offences.
Richie got roaded. The rest got lucky.
More so when the rule states that a defender is entitled to stay his ground...it's taking a step to left or right or an off the ball check that's a black card...
Feeney did not move his legs an inch either way, the card decision was harsh imo.
What could he have done different? just get clattered?
There were a number of cynical dragging fouls made to slow Castlebar's progress in attack in the last 1/4 of the game, which the ref penalised, but no sign of a card. I thought that was the kind of play which the black card was sold to congress on.
Though this shouldn't detract from Vincents one bit, without a doubt they were worthy winners, a wonderful club team on the day when it mattered.
The cynical dragging is not a black card offence though. The deliberate body check is. Not the refs fault the rule is silly.
Quote from: muppet on March 17, 2014, 10:39:07 PM
Well done Vincent's.
Gutted for Mitchels and in particular Richie.
Are you a Mitchel's man Muppet?
I remember us throwing one away in 99. We got over the line in 05 but it was closer than it should have been. It s been downhill for us sense.
Mitchel's are good enough to get back but they will have to get smarter and Mayo teams tend to retain their innocence so I wont be holding my breath.
To be successful a club team needs a good sprinkling of county players. Castlebar need Durkan involved with county asap.
In spite of his goals I don t think Kirby has developed like he should. He should have been burning things up today. He used to be lean and now he looks a bit pedestrian.
Anybody know what the attendance was today?
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on March 18, 2014, 03:35:41 AM
Anybody know what the attendance was today?
31,000 odd. Seemed less than last year but I was delirious so it's hard to be objective.
A fantastic tribute to the sheer individual class of Diarmuid Connolly in today's Indo.
The breadth of Diarmuid Connolly's extraordinary performance in Croke Park is captured best by the sheer weight of scoring statistics.
Connolly was directly involved as either scorer, provider or a link in the chain further back in 4-9 of his side's tally of 4-12.
Even the make up of the 2-5 he scored underlined the range of his ability, incorporating a goal with his fist, another off his left foot, three points off his left and two off his right. He directly set up another 2-2.
For two more scores – from Ruairi Trainor in the first half and Shane Carthy's third near the end – he delivered the telling pass in the build-up.
PACKAGE
The only Vincent's points that didn't have his magic touch all over them were two scores from Carthy, and a Mossy Quinn free after Daithi Murphy was fouled. It was the complete package from a forward.
Never before in the 44-year history of All-Ireland club football finals has there been an individual display like it. The 31,472 crowd were treated to something really special and in time that may soothe Castlebar's disappointment a little.
Connolly had been threatening such brilliance from the start but it was only when Vincent's fell behind for a third time that he really caught fire and showed the leadership that was evident in last year's All-Ireland semi-final against Kerry.
When Danny Kirby made the most from a rebound off an upright from a Neil Douglas point attempt in the 42nd minute to score Castlebar's opening goal and push them into a 1-11 to 2-7 lead, the promise of a third All-Ireland title for a Mayo club was rich.
The Leinster champions had been too casual with the space they had allowed their opponents. At times it looked like they were waiting for it to happen.
And they would still be waiting if Connolly had not decided to take matters into his own hands at that juncture.
It was as if he flicked a switch and took himself to a different level. Over the next 13 minutes he was the game's only scorer, helping himself to 2-3 as an eight point lead, 4-10 to 1-11, was established.
What he did had a mark of genius about it, first getting a touch to a free that had bounced over the heads of two Castlebar defenders to cancel out Kirby's strike quickly, then scoring two points before rifling a magnificent shot past Ciaran Naughton after his beleaguered marker Eoghan O'Reilly had briefly knocked him off his stride in the 53rd minute. His final point off his left was a fitting coup de grace to end all arguments completely.
On a day when Quinn, Vincent's commander in chief throughout the campaign, was well held by Tom Cunniffe, they really needed him to be that good.
Connolly's wonderful ability has long been flagged but his temperament and consistency have sometimes held him back.
From a technical point of view only Colm Cooper can be safely deemed to be superior. That shouldn't be mistaken for a claim to being the game's best footballer in Cooper's absence. But for the mechanics of movement and kicking, Connolly is a cut above almost everyone else.
Some of the passes he sprayed were so perfectly weighted and accurate, it felt like they had been computer-generated.
Vincent's created six clear-cut first- half goal chances but converted just two as Michael Concarr fired home after eight minutes and Ciaran Dorney batted to an empty net on 26 minutes after good work from Connolly.
That second goal wiped out a three-point advantage Castlebar had enjoyed as they came from three behind and put the setback of Richie Feeney's fifth-minute black card for a body check on Kevin Bonnie behind them.
It was the correct call by referee Eddie Kinsella but the emotional argument will surely be prompted by a player of Feeney's stature having to effectively miss an All-Ireland final.
Alan Feeney, Patrick Durcan, Neil Lydon, Aidan Walsh and Barry Moran were all influential in turning the game in Castlebar's favour in that 16-minute spell when they poured forward and picked their passes at ease.
But they were vulnerable to the counter-attack and needed goalkeeper Ciaran Naughton to pull off two smart saves.
COMPELLING
By the break Castlebar were level, 0-9 to 2-3, but were making the more compelling arguments. Vincent's wrested control early in the second half, however, and surged 2-7 to 0-10 clear.
Captain Ger Brennan, who started at centre-back, oozed control in possession and read the play superbly, while Hugh Gill and Concarr put Vincent's on the front foot from deep positions.
But it was Connolly's response to Kirby's goal that set them apart. Castlebar retained O'Reilly as his marker throughout, only switching Durcan on to him when it was over, and their own post-mortem is likely to dwell on that.
Quinn was the danger man coming into the match but surely Cunniffe could have been released at an early stage. Feeney's loss eventually told in that context.
The victory means that Connolly and Brennan are now, incredibly, in possession of every major title they can play for at club and inter-county level with Dublin, Leinster and All-Ireland championship success on top of last year's league victory. They both must have big trophy cabinets.
Feeney was stupid, it was as clear a black card as you would see. The rule clearly states 'Deliberately body collide with an opponent after he has played the ball away or for the purposes of taking him out of a movement of play.' Feeney drops his shoulder into the advancing player and that is a deliberate action to take him out of the play. Standing your ground means standing your ground not turning your shoulder into a player.
For what it is worth I think that Vincents would have won anyway. Like the hurling final before hand their extra bit of class and their experience of how to win big games was the difference. Connolly isa different class when he has space. He is very capable of winning his own ball too and he is very strong so he is hard to physically put out of the game. He simply needs to be marked 1 to 1 with a complete spoiler and there are very few who would be good enough to do that.
John Fogarty Examiner's take on Feeney
Castlebar had recovered well from Michael Concarr's side-footed goal in the ninth minute after an angled dash as well as Richie Feeney's fifth-minute black card to lead by two before Dorney's strike.
Feeney gave referee Eddie Kinsella plenty of reason to send him from the pitch — he was replaced by Fergal Durcan — although he stood his ground in blocking Kevin Bonnie. In briefings before Christmas it had been explained bodychecking would be black carded if they ran into the other player's running line.
Then again, Castlebar were fortunate Neil Lydon wasn't automatically replaced for two further incidents while Vincents' Eamon Fennell and Dorney were also lucky to stay on.
Quote from: orangeman on March 18, 2014, 09:21:26 AM
John Fogarty Examiner's take on Feeney
Castlebar had recovered well from Michael Concarr's side-footed goal in the ninth minute after an angled dash as well as Richie Feeney's fifth-minute black card to lead by two before Dorney's strike.
Feeney gave referee Eddie Kinsella plenty of reason to send him from the pitch — he was replaced by Fergal Durcan — although he stood his ground in blocking Kevin Bonnie. In briefings before Christmas it had been explained bodychecking would be black carded if they ran into the other player's running line.
Then again, Castlebar were fortunate Neil Lydon wasn't automatically replaced for two further incidents while Vincents' Eamon Fennell and Dorney were also lucky to stay on.
Feeney doesn't stand his ground
(http://balls.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/feeneyblack.gif)
Watch it, he deliberately steps across with his right foot and leads with his shoulder, clear cut black card. Perhaps there should have been others but there can be no complainty about this one. Remember that the refs are learning the rule as well as the players so there will be inconsistencies.
Portumna knew they probably weren't going to get another chance for a while at getting to Croke and they made the most of it, JC was all over the pitch, in the fullforward line and tackling in the fullback line, fair engine in him to be fair.
MLR tried their best, maybe it was the better pitch, faster ground, open spaces of Croke Park or just nerves, they put in a great first half shift but their handling and shot selections were letting them down and allowing Portumna to turn over ball, I'd like to see how many shots they took during the game, don't think it was a lot. They are a young enough looking team so they may come back, if they do they won't be taken for granted. They have certainly put Carlow club hurling on the map
What's Joe Canning's best position? Midfield or fullforward?
I would have said CHF MR. I think he suffers in FF as the ball is just lumped into him at times and also it's easier for him to be double marked - particularly the way Galway play.
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 18, 2014, 09:27:07 AM
Quote from: orangeman on March 18, 2014, 09:21:26 AM
John Fogarty Examiner's take on Feeney
Castlebar had recovered well from Michael Concarr's side-footed goal in the ninth minute after an angled dash as well as Richie Feeney's fifth-minute black card to lead by two before Dorney's strike.
Feeney gave referee Eddie Kinsella plenty of reason to send him from the pitch — he was replaced by Fergal Durcan — although he stood his ground in blocking Kevin Bonnie. In briefings before Christmas it had been explained bodychecking would be black carded if they ran into the other player's running line.
Then again, Castlebar were fortunate Neil Lydon wasn't automatically replaced for two further incidents while Vincents' Eamon Fennell and Dorney were also lucky to stay on.
Feeney doesn't stand his ground
(http://balls.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/feeneyblack.gif)
Watch it, he deliberately steps across with his right foot and leads with his shoulder, clear cut black card. Perhaps there should have been others but there can be no complainty about this one. Remember that the refs are learning the rule as well as the players so there will be inconsistencies.
No question on that one it's probably as clear cut an example as you can get... A player of Feeney's experience shouldn't be making a stupid mistake like that in an All Ireland Final!
Quote from: imtommygunn on March 18, 2014, 09:43:36 AM
I would have said CHF MR. I think he suffers in FF as the ball is just lumped into him at times and also it's easier for him to be double marked - particularly the way Galway play.
CHF is the hardest position on the pitch, you need to score, link up with players and stop their CHB from dictating the play!! FF has been the area that he's most dangerous but as you say lumping the ball in is a 50/50 and less if he's being double marked. Midfield gives him more room and there is less marking going on.
Never liked playing CHF and was always finding the right player for it, I don't think we've ever had a player that plays in that position constantly
That block looks a hell of a lot worse on that gif than it did in the original footage.
Gifs don't stand up in court as proper evidence though, it's too easy to manipulate them ;D
I know its the new rules and all that and to be honest, im a bit more swayed towards them that i was when they were first introduced, but seriously, are we really saying that a player gets sent off for what Feeney did? The charge would never in a million years injure a player and it means a player is sat watching probably the biggest game his club will ever play. A sin bin with no replacement for 10 mins maybe a suitable punishment - but being sent off for that just makes our games look virtually non contact and thats a route I really wouldnt like to see us go down.
Connolly was scaringly good yesterday. Hard to know how to handle a player like that when he's on top form.
Quote from: BennyHarp on March 18, 2014, 10:43:39 AM
I know its the new rules and all that and to be honest, im a bit more swayed towards them that i was when they were first introduced, but seriously, are we really saying that a player gets sent off for what Feeney did? The charge would never in a million years injure a player and it means a player is sat watching probably the biggest game his club will ever play. A sin bin for 10 mins maybe - but being sent off for that just makes our games look virtually non contact and thats a route I really wouldnt like to see us go down.
Totally agree Benny I always advocated the sin bin rather than what we currently have but now that the black card has led to a more open/less cynical game I think the Sin Bin will be lost when I think it's a much fairer system.
Quote from: BennyHarp on March 18, 2014, 10:43:39 AM
I know its the new rules and all that and to be honest, im a bit more swayed towards them that i was when they were first introduced, but seriously, are we really saying that a player gets sent off for what Feeney did? The charge would never in a million years injure a player and it means a player is sat watching probably the biggest game his club will ever play. A sin bin with no replacement for 10 mins maybe a suitable punishment - but being sent off for that just makes our games look virtually non contact and thats a route I really wouldnt like to see us go down.
But the sin bin is not part of the rules and Castlebar were able to put a sub on. I agree that the sin bin should have been retained but it wasn't so we have to deal with the rules as they are implemented. Black card or no black card what he did was a foul under the old rules anyway as he shoulder charged a man frontally.
Lets be fair, he was good but ffs he wasn't from another planet as some would have ye believe.
He wouldnt have gotten away with that performance against the likes of Cross. Sure he had the freedom of Croke Park, all the room he could ever want.
On another note, why did Feeney need to make shapes towards the guy. He had no need to make contact. It was as daft an action as ye could see. The rules are there, get on with them or get around them, don't whinge when ye break them and get punished.
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 18, 2014, 10:01:58 AM
Quote from: imtommygunn on March 18, 2014, 09:43:36 AM
I would have said CHF MR. I think he suffers in FF as the ball is just lumped into him at times and also it's easier for him to be double marked - particularly the way Galway play.
CHF is the hardest position on the pitch, you need to score, link up with players and stop their CHB from dictating the play!! FF has been the area that he's most dangerous but as you say lumping the ball in is a 50/50 and less if he's being double marked. Midfield gives him more room and there is less marking going on.
Never liked playing CHF and was always finding the right player for it, I don't think we've ever had a player that plays in that position constantly
The vision the guy has is unbelievable though and perfect for CHF.... Not even King Henry or DJ have ever had his kind of vision though he has a way to go before coming close to either in the rest of his play.
Connolly has been top drawer for a few years. The only player to mark him really effectively over the last few years was Lee Keegan who put him on the backfoot from the start. He doesn't blow as hot and cold as he used to. Ballinderry did a much better job on him than Castlebar but he did a fair bit of damage that day too more through passing than scoring.
Quote from: BennyHarp on March 18, 2014, 10:43:39 AM
I know its the new rules and all that and to be honest, im a bit more swayed towards them that i was when they were first introduced, but seriously, are we really saying that a player gets sent off for what Feeney did? The charge would never in a million years injure a player and it means a player is sat watching probably the biggest game his club will ever play. A sin bin with no replacement for 10 mins maybe a suitable punishment - but being sent off for that just makes our games look virtually non contact and thats a route I really wouldnt like to see us go down.
It's funny, I've seen more examples of good, fair shoulders in this years league than I have in a while.
I don't think the 3rd man tackle is something we need to worry about losing.
Quote from: ross4life on March 17, 2014, 08:28:21 PM
Quote from: moysider on March 17, 2014, 07:36:56 PM
Castlebar don t have any county standard forwards (Barry a midfielder and Richie a utility player). Once it became a shoot out there was only going to be one winner.
You don't think Douglas is county standard? i thought he showed well at U21 level for Mayo. I think Castlebars average score per game was around the same as Brigids last year & they had two county standard forwards in Kilbride,Dolan.
Quote from: INDIANA on March 17, 2014, 07:01:08 PM
Heart goes out to Castlebar. Losing a club final is losing a bride at the altar. Hope you get back fellas
Has taken Castlebar 20 years to get back to the AI final though probably only two sides at the moment good enough to topple them in Connacht. Established & well seasoned Brigids team just about bet Ballymun last years AI final it goes to show the shear strength of club football in Dublin at the moment. How would you compare this Vincents side with the last All Ireland winning team?
Individually Ross not as good. Collectively the current team is excellent however.
I would still argue (nit picking) that the 2008 team beat better quality opposition in Cross and Nemo then Balinderry and Castlebar in the AI Stages.
Its very difficult for a club side in the country to compete with the Dublin clubs. Its not a numbers thing in Dublin like people think. Its the professionalism end of it. The top 6 clubs in Dublin have inter county setups even though the players aren't all intercounty standard.
Quote from: Captain Obvious on March 17, 2014, 07:21:08 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on March 17, 2014, 07:01:08 PM
Then Quinn would have run amok. Cunniffe did really well today.
In fairness Quinn was very poor today and it wasn't anything to do with Tom Cunniffe marking him.
Wouldn't agree Cunniffe was tigerish I'd have said but its like everything you mark one of them well the other pops up but Diarmuid on form is a different level to most players in Ireland.
Quote from: imtommygunn on March 18, 2014, 11:11:50 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 18, 2014, 10:01:58 AM
Quote from: imtommygunn on March 18, 2014, 09:43:36 AM
I would have said CHF MR. I think he suffers in FF as the ball is just lumped into him at times and also it's easier for him to be double marked - particularly the way Galway play.
CHF is the hardest position on the pitch, you need to score, link up with players and stop their CHB from dictating the play!! FF has been the area that he's most dangerous but as you say lumping the ball in is a 50/50 and less if he's being double marked. Midfield gives him more room and there is less marking going on.
Never liked playing CHF and was always finding the right player for it, I don't think we've ever had a player that plays in that position constantly
The vision the guy has is unbelievable though and perfect for CHF.... Not even King Henry or DJ have ever had his kind of vision though he has a way to go before coming close to either in the rest of his play.
Connolly has been top drawer for a few years. The only player to mark him really effectively over the last few years was Lee Keegan who put him on the backfoot from the start. He doesn't blow as hot and cold as he used to. Ballinderry did a much better job on him than Castlebar but he did a fair bit of damage that day too more through passing than scoring.
Keegan is in my view the best wing back in Ireland. He'd give anyone problems.
Do you think Vindents can retain the Dublin Championship this year? Won't be long till it starts , no rest for the wicked
Quote from: rodney trotter on March 18, 2014, 01:07:45 PM
Do you think Vindents can retain the Dublin Championship this year? Won't be long till it starts , no rest for the wicked
No I don't personally. Its 6 years since we won Dublin and it was 25 before then. No guarantees I'm afraid. We're not winning much at underage either and thats going to bite us in the ass soon.
Connolly is a once in a lifetime player for any club. Wthout him we'd still be waiting for a Dublin championship. I wouldnt underestimate his influence.
I know Ballymun nearly did this year but I would argue it was that long run the previous year that cost them in the two games against us as they looked knackered in the second game.
Quote from: Jinxy on March 18, 2014, 11:16:55 AM
Quote from: BennyHarp on March 18, 2014, 10:43:39 AM
I know its the new rules and all that and to be honest, im a bit more swayed towards them that i was when they were first introduced, but seriously, are we really saying that a player gets sent off for what Feeney did? The charge would never in a million years injure a player and it means a player is sat watching probably the biggest game his club will ever play. A sin bin with no replacement for 10 mins maybe a suitable punishment - but being sent off for that just makes our games look virtually non contact and thats a route I really wouldnt like to see us go down.
It's funny, I've seen more examples of good, fair shoulders in this years league than I have in a while.
I don't think the 3rd man tackle is something we need to worry about losing.
I agree, the sin bin would be a better option. Feeney a county standard player had to be replaced by a sub on a club team, It made a huge difference in the game especially a club game.
That misses the point FL/Mayo. Feeney knew the rules (I assume) and he went and did that. It's a poster child for the black card. Absolutely nailed on cynical foul. As a county player he needs to have more nous than that in such a big game.
In real time it looked a lot less cynical, in slow motion it looks savagely cynical.
Some players may need to be sent to a good dog trainer in order to change instinctive habits of conduct.
Quote from: INDIANA on March 18, 2014, 01:06:07 PM
Quote from: imtommygunn on March 18, 2014, 11:11:50 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 18, 2014, 10:01:58 AM
Quote from: imtommygunn on March 18, 2014, 09:43:36 AM
I would have said CHF MR. I think he suffers in FF as the ball is just lumped into him at times and also it's easier for him to be double marked - particularly the way Galway play.
CHF is the hardest position on the pitch, you need to score, link up with players and stop their CHB from dictating the play!! FF has been the area that he's most dangerous but as you say lumping the ball in is a 50/50 and less if he's being double marked. Midfield gives him more room and there is less marking going on.
Never liked playing CHF and was always finding the right player for it, I don't think we've ever had a player that plays in that position constantly
The vision the guy has is unbelievable though and perfect for CHF.... Not even King Henry or DJ have ever had his kind of vision though he has a way to go before coming close to either in the rest of his play.
Connolly has been top drawer for a few years. The only player to mark him really effectively over the last few years was Lee Keegan who put him on the backfoot from the start. He doesn't blow as hot and cold as he used to. Ballinderry did a much better job on him than Castlebar but he did a fair bit of damage that day too more through passing than scoring.
Keegan is in my view the best wing back in Ireland. He'd give anyone problems.
Yep I'd agree.
Connolly has matured a lot as a player I think. He is sometimes prone to lash out but on his actual game itself he has learnt a lot. Against Kerry the other year when Dublin won the AI if I recall correctly he wasn't challenging the scoreboard or having one of his better days in this regard but he knew this and had a large saying in Dublin winning with his ability to retain possession. Instrumental in Vincents last AI win too. On his day almost unmarkable (e.g. the Tyrone game the other year) and definitely maturing a lot.
Quote from: Main Street on March 18, 2014, 01:42:05 PM
In real time it looked a lot less cynical, in slow motion it looks savagely cynical.
Some players may need to be sent to a good dog trainer in order to change instinctive habits of conduct.
Agreed. I was sitting close to it in the corner lower cusack/davin and it didn't look as bad, thought he would go though at the time.
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 18, 2014, 01:25:41 PM
That misses the point FL/Mayo. Feeney knew the rules (I assume) and he went and did that. It's a poster child for the black card. Absolutely nailed on cynical foul. As a county player he needs to have more nous than that in such a big game.
Progressive discipline might be a better option A.Z, the first offence you go in the sin bin, the second offence you are gone for good. I Like the rule as it is helping the game flow but the penalty for a rules infraction is too much for my liking.
Maybe. Of course the country's managers kicked the sin bin into touch a few years ago too. That never got a fair go. I'd prefer sin bin to black card as well to be fair.
It makes no odds what we would all prefer, it's what we have and Feeney should have known better and he let his team down. I would nearly rather a man get sent off for something worthwhile than a stupid thing like that. The thing is if he had just stood there ge would have had the same effect as it would have slowed the man down. Also he wasn't getting a return pass anyway.
It's not like what Feeney did is a hard thing not to do. It was literally one of the dumbest things I've ever seen anyone do on a football pitch. If I was a Castlebar man this morning I'd be spending a lot more time chewing Feeney out than ruminating on the black card.
There's absolutely nothing positive about off the ball body checks, they've been an utter blight on gaelic football for 15 years or more, we've finally eradicated them in almost 100% of cases, and yet because some moron gets himself sent off for one in the first few minutes of a big game we're lamenting the rules, talking about sin bins and all this stuff.
Just nonsense, give up your auld body checks and you won't have to spend any time on the sideline at all, be it 10 minutes in the bin or 55 minutes after a black card. I guarantee you we won't be seeing too many repeats of Feeney's stupidity yesterday for the remainder of the year, and thank god for that.
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 17, 2014, 07:26:21 PM
What was the story with the Vincent's lad with the American flag? Is there a yank playing with them?
Shane Carthy has been playing in New York for the last number of years. He may have moved out as a kid with family. Think this may be his first year with Vincent's, 2nd at the most
Quote from: Keane on March 18, 2014, 02:29:07 PM
It's not like what Feeney did is a hard thing not to do. It was literally one of the dumbest things I've ever seen anyone do on a football pitch. If I was a Castlebar man this morning I'd be spending a lot more time chewing Feeney out than ruminating on the black card.
There's absolutely nothing positive about off the ball body checks, they've been an utter blight on gaelic football for 15 years or more, we've finally eradicated them in almost 100% of cases, and yet because some moron gets himself sent off for one in the first few minutes of a big game we're lamenting the rules, talking about sin bins and all this stuff.
Just nonsense, give up your auld body checks and you won't have to spend any time on the sideline at all, be it 10 minutes in the bin or 55 minutes after a black card. I guarantee you we won't be seeing too many repeats of Feeney's stupidity yesterday for the remainder of the year, and thank god for that.
I would bet you any money that Richie will never be done again for a body-check, for the rest of his playing days.
He learned the hard way.
And I'll wager a lot of players will bear this particular example in mind next time someone is running towards them in the early stages of a game.
The take home message is quite simple.
Leave him run or you're gone.
Quote from: Keane on March 18, 2014, 02:29:07 PM
It's not like what Feeney did is a hard thing not to do. It was literally one of the dumbest things I've ever seen anyone do on a football pitch. If I was a Castlebar man this morning I'd be spending a lot more time chewing Feeney out than ruminating on the black card.
There's absolutely nothing positive about off the ball body checks, they've been an utter blight on gaelic football for 15 years or more, we've finally eradicated them in almost 100% of cases, and yet because some moron gets himself sent off for one in the first few minutes of a big game we're lamenting the rules, talking about sin bins and all this stuff.
Just nonsense, give up your auld body checks and you won't have to spend any time on the sideline at all, be it 10 minutes in the bin or 55 minutes after a black card. I guarantee you we won't be seeing too many repeats of Feeney's stupidity yesterday for the remainder of the year, and thank god for that.
I agree with most of this but a fairly minor foul (albeit extremely stupid given the new rules) in an area of the pitch where there was no real scoring threat and no real chance of physical harm to the opposition hardly deserves a sending off.
Some of these offences are just as dangerous (or in the case of feigning injury - a bigger blight) as the foul Feeney commited yet the player only recieves a yellow card and can play on.....
1. To block or attempt to block with the boot when an opponent is kicking the ball from the hand(s).
2. To prevent or attempt to prevent an opponent from lifting or kicking the ball off the ground by striking an opponent's hand, arm, foot or leg with the boot.
3. To engage in any other form of rough play.
4. To attempt to achieve an advantage by feigning a foul or injury
Quote from: BennyHarp on March 18, 2014, 03:17:58 PM
Quote from: Keane on March 18, 2014, 02:29:07 PM
It's not like what Feeney did is a hard thing not to do. It was literally one of the dumbest things I've ever seen anyone do on a football pitch. If I was a Castlebar man this morning I'd be spending a lot more time chewing Feeney out than ruminating on the black card.
There's absolutely nothing positive about off the ball body checks, they've been an utter blight on gaelic football for 15 years or more, we've finally eradicated them in almost 100% of cases, and yet because some moron gets himself sent off for one in the first few minutes of a big game we're lamenting the rules, talking about sin bins and all this stuff.
Just nonsense, give up your auld body checks and you won't have to spend any time on the sideline at all, be it 10 minutes in the bin or 55 minutes after a black card. I guarantee you we won't be seeing too many repeats of Feeney's stupidity yesterday for the remainder of the year, and thank god for that.
I agree with most of this but a fairly minor foul (albeit extremely stupid given the new rules) in an area of the pitch where there was no real scoring threat and no real chance of physical harm to the opposition hardly deserves a sending off.
Some of these offences are just as dangerous (or in the case of feigning injury - a bigger blight) as the foul Feeney commited yet the player only recieves a yellow card and can play on.....
1. To block or attempt to block with the boot when an opponent is kicking the ball from the hand(s).
2. To prevent or attempt to prevent an opponent from lifting or kicking the ball off the ground by striking an opponent's hand, arm, foot or leg with the boot.
3. To engage in any other form of rough play.
4. To attempt to achieve an advantage by feigning a foul or injury
This one should be a black card too.
Quote from: BennyHarp on March 18, 2014, 03:17:58 PM
Quote from: Keane on March 18, 2014, 02:29:07 PM
It's not like what Feeney did is a hard thing not to do. It was literally one of the dumbest things I've ever seen anyone do on a football pitch. If I was a Castlebar man this morning I'd be spending a lot more time chewing Feeney out than ruminating on the black card.
There's absolutely nothing positive about off the ball body checks, they've been an utter blight on gaelic football for 15 years or more, we've finally eradicated them in almost 100% of cases, and yet because some moron gets himself sent off for one in the first few minutes of a big game we're lamenting the rules, talking about sin bins and all this stuff.
Just nonsense, give up your auld body checks and you won't have to spend any time on the sideline at all, be it 10 minutes in the bin or 55 minutes after a black card. I guarantee you we won't be seeing too many repeats of Feeney's stupidity yesterday for the remainder of the year, and thank god for that.
I agree with most of this but a fairly minor foul (albeit extremely stupid given the new rules) in an area of the pitch where there was no real scoring threat and no real chance of physical harm to the opposition hardly deserves a sending off.
Some of these offences are just as dangerous (or in the case of feigning injury - a bigger blight) as the foul Feeney commited yet the player only recieves a yellow card and can play on.....
1. To block or attempt to block with the boot when an opponent is kicking the ball from the hand(s).
2. To prevent or attempt to prevent an opponent from lifting or kicking the ball off the ground by striking an opponent's hand, arm, foot or leg with the boot.
3. To engage in any other form of rough play.
4. To attempt to achieve an advantage by feigning a foul or injury
The black card is not meant to address
dangerous play though.
Quote from: Jinxy on March 18, 2014, 03:27:30 PM
Quote from: BennyHarp on March 18, 2014, 03:17:58 PM
Quote from: Keane on March 18, 2014, 02:29:07 PM
It's not like what Feeney did is a hard thing not to do. It was literally one of the dumbest things I've ever seen anyone do on a football pitch. If I was a Castlebar man this morning I'd be spending a lot more time chewing Feeney out than ruminating on the black card.
There's absolutely nothing positive about off the ball body checks, they've been an utter blight on gaelic football for 15 years or more, we've finally eradicated them in almost 100% of cases, and yet because some moron gets himself sent off for one in the first few minutes of a big game we're lamenting the rules, talking about sin bins and all this stuff.
Just nonsense, give up your auld body checks and you won't have to spend any time on the sideline at all, be it 10 minutes in the bin or 55 minutes after a black card. I guarantee you we won't be seeing too many repeats of Feeney's stupidity yesterday for the remainder of the year, and thank god for that.
I agree with most of this but a fairly minor foul (albeit extremely stupid given the new rules) in an area of the pitch where there was no real scoring threat and no real chance of physical harm to the opposition hardly deserves a sending off.
Some of these offences are just as dangerous (or in the case of feigning injury - a bigger blight) as the foul Feeney commited yet the player only recieves a yellow card and can play on.....
1. To block or attempt to block with the boot when an opponent is kicking the ball from the hand(s).
2. To prevent or attempt to prevent an opponent from lifting or kicking the ball off the ground by striking an opponent's hand, arm, foot or leg with the boot.
3. To engage in any other form of rough play.
4. To attempt to achieve an advantage by feigning a foul or injury
The black card is not meant to address dangerous play though.
Yes, but should dangerous play not incur a greater sanction than cynical play? Being sent from the field of play for a fairly harmless body charge, yet being allowed to stay on the field for a dangerous tackle doesnt quite seem right to me. But thats the way it is and it looks like the games are better for it.
Well I suppose dangerous play would carry the risk of a red card, which is obviously worse than a black for your team. But I think diving is just as cynical as the actual fouls designated as such.
Quote from: BennyHarp on March 18, 2014, 03:17:58 PM
Quote from: Keane on March 18, 2014, 02:29:07 PM
It's not like what Feeney did is a hard thing not to do. It was literally one of the dumbest things I've ever seen anyone do on a football pitch. If I was a Castlebar man this morning I'd be spending a lot more time chewing Feeney out than ruminating on the black card.
There's absolutely nothing positive about off the ball body checks, they've been an utter blight on gaelic football for 15 years or more, we've finally eradicated them in almost 100% of cases, and yet because some moron gets himself sent off for one in the first few minutes of a big game we're lamenting the rules, talking about sin bins and all this stuff.
Just nonsense, give up your auld body checks and you won't have to spend any time on the sideline at all, be it 10 minutes in the bin or 55 minutes after a black card. I guarantee you we won't be seeing too many repeats of Feeney's stupidity yesterday for the remainder of the year, and thank god for that.
I agree with most of this but a fairly minor foul (albeit extremely stupid given the new rules) in an area of the pitch where there was no real scoring threat and no real chance of physical harm to the opposition hardly deserves a sending off.
Some of these offences are just as dangerous (or in the case of feigning injury - a bigger blight) as the foul Feeney commited yet the player only recieves a yellow card and can play on.....
1. To block or attempt to block with the boot when an opponent is kicking the ball from the hand(s).
2. To prevent or attempt to prevent an opponent from lifting or kicking the ball off the ground by striking an opponent's hand, arm, foot or leg with the boot.
3. To engage in any other form of rough play.
4. To attempt to achieve an advantage by feigning a foul or injury
I really don't agree that feigning a foul or injury has been a bigger blight on the game than body checks.
It may be something that makes people more annoyed when they see it, but body checking had become a constant and systematic feature of the game at all levels all over the country. Players diving here and there is not on the same level in terms of how badly it affected games over a long period, although it should certainly be a black card as well.
The reason why I think something like Feeney's tackle should 100% be a line-worthy offence is the sheer contempt it shows for the rules of the game. It might not be dangerous to another player's safety but it's something you can only do when fair play and respect for the rules is something you just don't give a damn about. It's utterly cynical.
Even worse that he did it in an area of the pitch where there was no real scoring threat to my mind, as it just shows such a bad attitude, why do it at all in that position?
As I said in my other post, I could have sympathy for someone black carded early for what was seen as pulling down an opponent or similar, because you can see someone managing to make a complete hash of a genuine tackle ending up on the end of a black card, anyone who gets one for a body check I find it much harder, because it's something you can so easily avoid that ending up in that situation can only be because you decided to wantonly act the maggot.
Quote from: ballinaman on March 18, 2014, 01:50:07 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 18, 2014, 01:42:05 PM
In real time it looked a lot less cynical, in slow motion it looks savagely cynical.
Some players may need to be sent to a good dog trainer in order to change instinctive habits of conduct.
Agreed. I was sitting close to it in the corner lower cusack/davin and it didn't look as bad, thought he would go though at the time.
Cast iron black card fellas. You either have a rule or you don't. You can see the ref saying to him that there was nothing he could do and it was the correct call
This is proof that the black card will be seen as a poorly thought out attempt to clean up the game. As some others have mentioned the sin bin would have been a better rule.
The fun will really start come the championship when the refs start interpreting the rules differently. A typical example over the weekend was in Castlebar on Sunday where I was full sure that Cillian O'Connor was going to see black for a high challenge that culminated in a drag down. The ref gave him yellow instead. He went on to get our 4th goal which finished Cork off.
I don't think there was ever that much of a problem with diving anyway, but with the advantage rule it doesn't really make sense to go down unless you are actually genuinely dragged down.
Now, the more cynical amongst you will say that players will go down in order to get the tackler a black card but from what I've seen so far the refs are making a clear distinction between a player being dragged down and a player 'losing his balance' after being tackled.
Quote from: INDIANA on March 18, 2014, 04:22:31 PM
Quote from: ballinaman on March 18, 2014, 01:50:07 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 18, 2014, 01:42:05 PM
In real time it looked a lot less cynical, in slow motion it looks savagely cynical.
Some players may need to be sent to a good dog trainer in order to change instinctive habits of conduct.
Agreed. I was sitting close to it in the corner lower cusack/davin and it didn't look as bad, thought he would go though at the time.
Cast iron black card fellas. You either have a rule or you don't. You can see the ref saying to him that there was nothing he could do and it was the correct call
I'm glad you have come around to your senses Indiana and agree with us, that it was a cast iron black card for a savage cynical block :)
I thought a completion started under the old rules would still be refereed under those rules until finished
That's a fair point about inconsistencies.
The ref in the Derry Dubs game on Sunday was doing his best not to issue one and was handing out yellows for blatant black card offences.
Our corner back who eventually got sent off should have got a black card early in the 2nd half. Likewise Philly McMahon should have definitely seen black earlier.
It seems to be ticking over OK for now but it will be interesting come the Championship when the stakes are higher what will go on!!!
Quote from: Denn Forever on March 18, 2014, 05:10:20 PM
I thought a completion started under the old rules would still be refereed under those rules until finished
I would have assumed the same. Unless they are treating the 'All-Ireland series' (semis and final) as a separate competition.
If that's the case, it would have started in the new year when the new rules were in place.
Overall I think the rule is well intentioned, but like all rules it needs to be interpreted clearly and implemented consistently.
I know the players and coach are supposed to know the rules, but would it not help all involved for the referee to attend each teams final session prior to a final, to give the teams a clear indication as to what he will be looking for.
I seem to recall that the great Kerry team of the 80s always invited the referee to attend a session in the lead up to the final.....but I could be completely wrong on that
Quote from: Tubberman on March 18, 2014, 05:22:40 PM
Quote from: Denn Forever on March 18, 2014, 05:10:20 PM
I thought a completion started under the old rules would still be refereed under those rules until finished
I would have assumed the same. Unless they are treating the 'All-Ireland series' (semis and final) as a separate competition.
If that's the case, it would have started in the new year when the new rules were in place.
I seem to remember hearing about some fouls in the respective semi finals where black cards were not brandished, yellows were given instead. at the time someone (wrongly) suggested that the black card was not in force for this competition
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 18, 2014, 09:27:07 AM
Quote from: orangeman on March 18, 2014, 09:21:26 AM
John Fogarty Examiner's take on Feeney
Castlebar had recovered well from Michael Concarr's side-footed goal in the ninth minute after an angled dash as well as Richie Feeney's fifth-minute black card to lead by two before Dorney's strike.
Feeney gave referee Eddie Kinsella plenty of reason to send him from the pitch — he was replaced by Fergal Durcan — although he stood his ground in blocking Kevin Bonnie. In briefings before Christmas it had been explained bodychecking would be black carded if they ran into the other player's running line.
Then again, Castlebar were fortunate Neil Lydon wasn't automatically replaced for two further incidents while Vincents' Eamon Fennell and Dorney were also lucky to stay on.
Feeney doesn't stand his ground
(http://balls.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/feeneyblack.gif)
Watch it, he deliberately steps across with his right foot and leads with his shoulder, clear cut black card. Perhaps there should have been others but there can be no complainty about this one. Remember that the refs are learning the rule as well as the players so there will be inconsistencies.
Watch it even closer BC. Feeney's left foot never leaves the ground and then watch it again only looking at Bonnie. Bonnie runs straight at Feeney and raises his hands. If he had turned his shoulder we wouldn't be having this debate. Instead he raised his hands. Still, I would give a free against Feeney, but I wouldn't completely buy the 'deliberate block' by a man who runs straight into another.
Not as clear cut as you might think.
Regardless, it is terribly sad that our game has gone down the road of giving a fella his marching orders after 5 minutes for a challenge that was 70/70 or even 80/20 or whatever your take on it was.
Quote from: muppet on March 18, 2014, 08:34:30 PM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 18, 2014, 09:27:07 AM
Quote from: orangeman on March 18, 2014, 09:21:26 AM
John Fogarty Examiner's take on Feeney
Castlebar had recovered well from Michael Concarr's side-footed goal in the ninth minute after an angled dash as well as Richie Feeney's fifth-minute black card to lead by two before Dorney's strike.
Feeney gave referee Eddie Kinsella plenty of reason to send him from the pitch — he was replaced by Fergal Durcan — although he stood his ground in blocking Kevin Bonnie. In briefings before Christmas it had been explained bodychecking would be black carded if they ran into the other player's running line.
Then again, Castlebar were fortunate Neil Lydon wasn't automatically replaced for two further incidents while Vincents' Eamon Fennell and Dorney were also lucky to stay on.
Feeney doesn't stand his ground
(http://balls.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/feeneyblack.gif)
Watch it, he deliberately steps across with his right foot and leads with his shoulder, clear cut black card. Perhaps there should have been others but there can be no complainty about this one. Remember that the refs are learning the rule as well as the players so there will be inconsistencies.
Watch it even closer BC. Feeney's left foot never leaves the ground and then watch it again only looking at Bonnie. Bonnie runs straight at Feeney and raises his hands. If he had turned his shoulder we wouldn't be having this debate. Instead he raised his hands. Still, I would give a free against Feeney, but I wouldn't completely buy the 'deliberate block' by a man who runs straight into another.
Not as clear cut as you might think.
Regardless, it is terribly sad that our game has gone down the road of giving a fella his marching orders after 5 minutes for a challenge that was 70/70 or even 80/20 or whatever your take on it was.
Rules are rules and there is no 80/20 there. Its 100% a black card. Bonnie was probably looking at feeney in disbelief saying this guy is actually going to bodycheck me 5 yards away from the referee.
Expect that video to be in every referee manual this year
It tough to think that one foul like that and you day is done! No second chance that the yellow offers, no sin bin to think about it and make amends! Gone!
All them weeks of sacrificing, training, dreaming.
All from Sean Cavanagh (not for one minute blaming the lad and sorry for digging this up) making a last ditch Rugby tackle to stop a certain goal last summer and Brolly losing the rag!
I mean it was supposed to stop this happening again. So if we come to the same scenario this summer a couple of minutes to go in a Championship game what will Sean Cavanagh do?
I thought it was going to be a black card all the way. There would have been uproar if it wasn t.
I do feel sorry for Richie though and I can t remember him do anything like that before the new rules. A moment of madness.
Perhaps it was a bit unfair to introduce new rules at a stage in a competition when so much is at stake - semis and final.
Most players will have less critical games to adapt to new rules for their clubs and county before the serious stuff starts.
I recall Aidan O Shea gettin the line in first league game and thinking that this could happen everytime he plays. But you can see him now actively resisting the temptation to decapitate somebody. He hasn t been in trouble sense but is still imposing physically.
Maybe Pat Holmes is lucky that this incident is distracting from his own performance.
In February 2012 Connolly ran riot in a league match in Castlebar before the game was abandoned. Remember the smoke from the turf fires on McHale road mixed with a bit of fog to cause a right soup to develop. The thing is, who was trying to mark Conolly and getting a right chasing around McHale Park? Yip, Eoghan O Reilly.
For the replay O Reilly was dropped. Connolly was kept quiet and scored 1 free before picking up his second yellow in a frustrated display. Cant remember who was marking him but it may have been Keith.
Don t get me wrong. Connolly deserves all the plaudits he gets for his final display. He can only play what s in front of him after all. Everybody knows how technically good he is and you would expect that a serious manager would know by now the type of player needed to frustrate him. O Reilly had history he wasn t up to it. What were they thinking ::)
Indiana mentioned earlier about the professional, intercounty standard management systems in the top Dublin clubs. I don t think there is the same standard down. Holmes seemed to be winging it a bit judging by interviews. Ould guff about honesty and stuff is just hot air.
Feeney might have got away with it if he hadn't lowered his shoulder into the Vincents player. Straight into his chest too. Can't have many complaints. It was almost a text book example of what they are trying to stamp out. Feeney was probably just pumped up early on in the game but you'd imagine such an experienced player wouldn't be the one to make such a mental error.
QuoteAll from Sean Cavanagh (not for one minute blaming the lad and sorry for digging this up) making a last ditch Rugby tackle to stop a certain goal last summer and Brolly losing the rag!
I mean it was supposed to stop this happening again. So if we come to the same scenario this summer a couple of minutes to go in a Championship game what will Sean Cavanagh do?
I hope that's tongue in cheek? It wasn't brought in due to one tackle and the reaction, there was a serious issue with cynical fouling in Gaelic football for a long time, that was just a poster boy version of what was going on. Neither was it supposed to stop it, it was supposed to discourage it which is exactly what has happened.
On Feeney's challenge, it was a yellow rather than a black for me but it was a hugely daft thing to do and it matters not a jot when he did it or how how many training sessions he did.
Quote from: From the Bunker on March 18, 2014, 09:23:05 PM
It tough to think that one foul like that and you day is done! No second chance that the yellow offers, no sin bin to think about it and make amends! Gone!
All them weeks of sacrificing, training, dreaming.
All from Sean Cavanagh (not for one minute blaming the lad and sorry for digging this up) making a last ditch Rugby tackle to stop a certain goal last summer and Brolly losing the rag!
I mean it was supposed to stop this happening again. So if we come to the same scenario this summer a couple of minutes to go in a Championship game what will Sean Cavanagh do?
The black card rule was passed long before Sean Cavanagh did his best BOD impression!
Quote from: moysider on March 18, 2014, 09:27:23 PM
I thought it was going to be a black card all the way. There would have been uproar if it wasn t.
I do feel sorry for Richie though and I can t remember him do anything like that before the new rules. A moment of madness.
Perhaps it was a bit unfair to introduce new rules at a stage in a competition when so much is at stake - semis and final.
Most players will have less critical games to adapt to new rules for their clubs and county before the serious stuff starts.
I recall Aidan O Shea gettin the line in first league game and thinking that this could happen everytime he plays. But you can see him now actively resisting the temptation to decapitate somebody. He hasn t been in trouble sense but is still imposing physically.
Maybe Pat Holmes is lucky that this incident is distracting from his own performance.
In February 2012 Connolly ran riot in a league match in Castlebar before the game was abandoned. Remember the smoke from the turf fires on McHale road mixed with a bit of fog to cause a right soup to develop. The thing is, who was trying to mark Conolly and getting a right chasing around McHale Park? Yip, Eoghan O Reilly.
For the replay O Reilly was dropped. Connolly was kept quiet and scored 1 free before picking up his second yellow in a frustrated display. Cant remember who was marking him but it may have been Keith.
Don t get me wrong. Connolly deserves all the plaudits he gets for his final display. He can only play what s in front of him after all. Everybody knows how technically good he is and you would expect that a serious manager would know by now the type of player needed to frustrate him. O Reilly had history he wasn t up to it. What were they thinking ::)
Indiana mentioned earlier about the professional, intercounty standard management systems in the top Dublin clubs. I don t think there is the same standard down. Holmes seemed to be winging it a bit judging by interviews. Ould guff about honesty and stuff is just hot air.
Richie Feeney marked Connolly in the second half of the 2012 AI semi. And did well too. Now I'm open to correction on that but I think I have that right.
From our point of view we couldn't believe he wasn't placed at the start to mark Connolly.
Quote from: muppet on March 18, 2014, 08:34:30 PM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 18, 2014, 09:27:07 AM
Quote from: orangeman on March 18, 2014, 09:21:26 AM
John Fogarty Examiner's take on Feeney
Castlebar had recovered well from Michael Concarr's side-footed goal in the ninth minute after an angled dash as well as Richie Feeney's fifth-minute black card to lead by two before Dorney's strike.
Feeney gave referee Eddie Kinsella plenty of reason to send him from the pitch — he was replaced by Fergal Durcan — although he stood his ground in blocking Kevin Bonnie. In briefings before Christmas it had been explained bodychecking would be black carded if they ran into the other player's running line.
Then again, Castlebar were fortunate Neil Lydon wasn't automatically replaced for two further incidents while Vincents' Eamon Fennell and Dorney were also lucky to stay on.
Feeney doesn't stand his ground
(http://balls.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/feeneyblack.gif)
Watch it, he deliberately steps across with his right foot and leads with his shoulder, clear cut black card. Perhaps there should have been others but there can be no complainty about this one. Remember that the refs are learning the rule as well as the players so there will be inconsistencies.
Watch it even closer BC. Feeney's left foot never leaves the ground and then watch it again only looking at Bonnie. Bonnie runs straight at Feeney and raises his hands. If he had turned his shoulder we wouldn't be having this debate. Instead he raised his hands. Still, I would give a free against Feeney, but I wouldn't completely buy the 'deliberate block' by a man who runs straight into another.
Not as clear cut as you might think.
Regardless, it is terribly sad that our game has gone down the road of giving a fella his marching orders after 5 minutes for a challenge that was 70/70 or even 80/20 or whatever your take on it was.
Sorry muppet, have to disagree, totally clear cut. As obvious a black as you'll see all year. Sad for Feeney and Castlebar but it's 100% his own fault.
This is a clear cut black card as the rules stand. The point I was making earlier is that is this offence really worth a fella having to leave the field? As the year progresses and players are getting black carded for fairly innocuous tackles I think people will start to question whether the punishment fits the crime. It's all very well being sent to the line in a league game in February for a bit of a shoulder block but if it's the main man for a county in the first minute of an AI final when players are a bit hyped up and bouncing into tackles, then we might either see massive inconsistency or a punishment applied that is far too strong. Just out of interest how would Tadhg Kennellys tackle on Nicholas Murphy been dealt with under the new rules? Was that a black or a yellow? I believe a 10 min sin bin giving the advantage of 15 v 14 should have been trialled or at least the black card should have been trialled first.
Sorry muppet. Have to disagree on that one. If they hadn't already passed the rule, this would have made Brollys video for congress.
Quote from: BennyHarp on March 18, 2014, 09:57:41 PM
This is a clear cut black card as the rules stand. The point I was making earlier is that is this offence really worth a fella having to leave the field? As the year progresses and players are getting black carded for fairly innocuous tackles I think people will start to question whether the punishment fits the crime. It's all very well being sent to the line in a league game in February for a bit of a shoulder block but if it's the main man for a county in the first minute of an AI final when players are a bit hyped up and bouncing into tackles, then we might either see massive inconsistency or a punishment applied that is far too strong. Just out of interest how would Tadhg Kennellys tackle on Nicholas Murphy been dealt with under the new rules? Was that a black or a yellow? I believe a 10 min sin bin giving the advantage of 15 v 14 should have been trialled or at least the black card should have been trialled first.
That was a straight red under any rules! Was it Marty Duffy that bottled it.
I hear what you are saying though. From the games I m watching though I m getting the impression that players are coming to terms with the new rules. At least the better defenders are. Take Cafferkey the last day. He was switched onto a player on fire and snuffed out the threat without giving away a free. Habitual neck wringers like Aidan O Shea are not commiting themselves rashly. Mayo v Cork there was a black card tackle I thought and it was by a forward on the oppositions 20 metre line! That was just rash and lazy by a player in first game back.
There will be black cards during the championship but any player that gets one will probably deserve/earn it.
The black card will become a tool for the smarter coaches. A black card will end up being a deliberate choice by a player. I would expect a player to take a black card for the team in certain obvious circumstances. Then replace him with a fresh player.
Some players will engineer cards for opponents. The Feeney card, while justified, will also encourage players who lay off the ball, to continue their run straight into an opponent and simulate a body check. The ref will have to make that call.
A top forward taking a black for a silly tackle is the big no-no from a coaching perspective. The Seán Cavanagh type offence is the card you want a player to take. Prevents a certain goal. Time is nearly up and a tired player is replaced by a fresh one.
Bullshite muppet, was a black card all day long. Feeney never takes his eye off Bonnie, not a bit interested in the ball. He simply has to turn his back and let Bonnie clatter into him and it would have been marked down as a clumsy accident. He braces for the tackle and buries the shoulder, even the slightest attempt to appear honest would have got him off with it.
Quote from: muppet on March 18, 2014, 08:34:30 PM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 18, 2014, 09:27:07 AM
Quote from: orangeman on March 18, 2014, 09:21:26 AM
John Fogarty Examiner's take on Feeney
Castlebar had recovered well from Michael Concarr's side-footed goal in the ninth minute after an angled dash as well as Richie Feeney's fifth-minute black card to lead by two before Dorney's strike.
Feeney gave referee Eddie Kinsella plenty of reason to send him from the pitch — he was replaced by Fergal Durcan — although he stood his ground in blocking Kevin Bonnie. In briefings before Christmas it had been explained bodychecking would be black carded if they ran into the other player's running line.
Then again, Castlebar were fortunate Neil Lydon wasn't automatically replaced for two further incidents while Vincents' Eamon Fennell and Dorney were also lucky to stay on.
Feeney doesn't stand his ground
(http://balls.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/feeneyblack.gif)
Watch it, he deliberately steps across with his right foot and leads with his shoulder, clear cut black card. Perhaps there should have been others but there can be no complainty about this one. Remember that the refs are learning the rule as well as the players so there will be inconsistencies.
Watch it even closer BC. Feeney's left foot never leaves the ground and then watch it again only looking at Bonnie. Bonnie runs straight at Feeney and raises his hands. If he had turned his shoulder we wouldn't be having this debate. Instead he raised his hands. Still, I would give a free against Feeney, but I wouldn't completely buy the 'deliberate block' by a man who runs straight into another.
Not as clear cut as you might think.
Regardless, it is terribly sad that our game has gone down the road of giving a fella his marching orders after 5 minutes for a challenge that was 70/70 or even 80/20 or whatever your take on it was.
Horseshit. If a black card didn't exist this would be the clearest justification for introducing it. ::)
Poor Tom Humphries used to write a lot about Vincents before the demons took over.
Muppet he deliberately changes his body position to turn his shoulder into the Vincents man's chest. Mike is absolutely correct, this is the exact type of offence that the blackcard was introduced to eradicate. There was no ball to play and he shouldered him straight down the middle, the archetypal 3rd man tackle.
Quote from: seafoid on March 18, 2014, 11:00:31 PM
Poor Tom Humphries used to write a lot about Vincents before the demons took over.
f**k him!
Quote from: Dinny Breen on March 18, 2014, 11:42:10 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 18, 2014, 11:00:31 PM
Poor Tom Humphries used to write a lot about Vincents before the demons took over.
f**k him!
Thought that a bit of a strange one too seafoid. Why the sympathy?
Feel desperately sorry for Feeny even tho he deserved the black card.Can anybody imagine lasting 4 minutes in the biggest game of your life and then having to sit and watch your team eventually lose an all ireland final.If that is not sheer torture then I do not know what is.I have gained great respect for him after last years all ireland final where he put down his non appearance to the managers wish to go in a different direction on the day .It must have been desperately disappointing for him on a personal level but he put that behind him and was Castlebars best player on there run to the all ireland final.
Feeneys tweet is an honest one , just like his tweet after the Dublin game too. No more needs to be said on the issue.
I hope to Christ he gets a chance with Mayo now, he's a great asset and playing mighty stuff too.
Hard for Feeney to be out for most of the club final but no defence possible - clearest bodycheck you could see and straight in front of the referee. A lot of players will reconsider this tactic having seen this example. Could actually see referee saying he had no option..
A bit like the Portlaois lad that got sent off in the All Ireland club semi final in the first minute. Was the easiest decision out in fairness and all that effort to get there ultimately cost them in that game
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 18, 2014, 11:11:47 PM
Muppet he deliberately changes his body position to turn his shoulder into the Vincents man's chest. Mike is absolutely correct, this is the exact type of offence that the blackcard was introduced to eradicate. There was no ball to play and he shouldered him straight down the middle, the archetypal 3rd man tackle.
The Gif is very misleading as the camera, and anyone watching it, is following the ball and the Vincents player. Everything in the picture is moving from right to left, except Feeney. Thus it looks as if Feeney is the intruder in the scene. But Feeney is stationary. His left foot never leaves the ground, so the Gif doesn't do him any justice. Yes he turns his shoulder to the man. That is what most Gaa players do when there is a possibility of a collision and if the Vincent's player did the same, nothing would have happened. However the Vincent's player, who is clearly looking straight at Feeney, and who is the one moving, continues straight into Feeney.
That is why I am calling it a 70/30 or 80/20 decision. Yes it is a free, because Feeney leads with the shoulder and should only do that when the other player is leading with his shoulder. But while Feeney turns and sets himself up, his left foot never leaves the ground. He is actually stationary while the Vincent's player runs into him. Deliberate block or deliberate charge? Reasonable doubt in any book and no way deserving of having his season immediately ended.
To those blindly insisting that 'rules are rules', you don't mention common sense anywhere. This is the Sepp Blatter approach to refereeing, i.e. no thinking just follow my rules and imho is a very dangerous road to go down.
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 09:44:41 AM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 18, 2014, 11:11:47 PM
Muppet he deliberately changes his body position to turn his shoulder into the Vincents man's chest. Mike is absolutely correct, this is the exact type of offence that the blackcard was introduced to eradicate. There was no ball to play and he shouldered him straight down the middle, the archetypal 3rd man tackle.
The Gif is very misleading as the camera, and anyone watching it, is following the ball and the Vincents player. Everything in the picture is moving from right to left, except Feeney. Thus it looks as if Feeney is the intruder in the scene. But Feeney is stationary. His left foot never leaves the ground, so the Gif doesn't do him any justice. Yes he turns his shoulder to the man. That is what most Gaa players do when there is a possibility of a collision and if the Vincent's player did the same, nothing would have happened. However the Vincent's player, who is clearly looking straight at Feeney, and who is the one moving, continues straight into Feeney.
That is why I am calling it a 70/30 or 80/20 decision. Yes it is a free, because Feeney leads with the shoulder and should only do that when the other player is leading with his shoulder. But while Feeney turns and sets himself up, his left foot never leaves the ground. He is actually stationary while the Vincent's player runs into him. Deliberate block or deliberate charge? Reasonable doubt in any book and no way deserving of having his season immediately ended.
To those blindly insisting that 'rules are rules', you don't mention common sense anywhere. This is the Sepp Blatter approach to refereeing, i.e. no thinking just follow my rules and imho is a very dangerous road to go down.
Muppet, its a black card all day long. The ref had no choice. He was almost apologising to Feeney. As boys have said, this is the example they will use in the future. Poor chap has to sit and watch his team for most of the most important match in their time...really really tough on him. Quality player who would have added so much to the final. Will make others think twice about body checking a man.
Quote from: Bojangles on March 19, 2014, 09:25:13 AM
Hard for Feeney to be out for most of the club final but no defence possible - clearest bodycheck you could see and straight in front of the referee. A lot of players will reconsider this tactic having seen this example. Could actually see referee saying he had no option..
The single biggest positive from the black card in the near removal of the off the ball body check that had become so prevalent. The ref had absolutely no option. Maybe Feeney just completely forgot about the rule.
Black cards are generally hard to get. People saying there should have been 3 or 4 (or 5 or 6!) black cards in the Derry-Dublin game are talking absolute horse manure. I watched about 90% of the game, and there wasn't one additional black card incident that I saw.
Quote from: Hound on March 19, 2014, 09:51:24 AM
Quote from: Bojangles on March 19, 2014, 09:25:13 AM
Hard for Feeney to be out for most of the club final but no defence possible - clearest bodycheck you could see and straight in front of the referee. A lot of players will reconsider this tactic having seen this example. Could actually see referee saying he had no option..
The single biggest positive from the black card in the near removal of the off the ball body check that had become so prevalent. The ref had absolutely no option. Maybe Feeney just completely forgot about the rule.
Black cards are generally hard to get. People saying there should have been 3 or 4 (or 5 or 6!) black cards in the Derry-Dublin game are talking absolute horse manure. I watched about 90% of the game, and there wasn't one additional black card incident that I saw.
I've watched a lot of games recently and I would say that it depends to a fair degree on the referee.
I've seen referees almost not paying any heed to the new black card rule. I've seen refs giving a yellow card in lieu of a black. I've seen refs giving black cards for mistimed tackles where there was no intention of deliberately dragging down a player. And I've seen refs doing it properly but I would have to say that they're in the minority.
So I wouldn't agree that it's difficult to get a black card. Far from it.
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 09:44:41 AM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 18, 2014, 11:11:47 PM
Muppet he deliberately changes his body position to turn his shoulder into the Vincents man's chest. Mike is absolutely correct, this is the exact type of offence that the blackcard was introduced to eradicate. There was no ball to play and he shouldered him straight down the middle, the archetypal 3rd man tackle.
The Gif is very misleading as the camera, and anyone watching it, is following the ball and the Vincents player. Everything in the picture is moving from right to left, except Feeney. Thus it looks as if Feeney is the intruder in the scene. But Feeney is stationary. His left foot never leaves the ground, so the Gif doesn't do him any justice. Yes he turns his shoulder to the man. That is what most Gaa players do when there is a possibility of a collision and if the Vincent's player did the same, nothing would have happened. However the Vincent's player, who is clearly looking straight at Feeney, and who is the one moving, continues straight into Feeney.
That is why I am calling it a 70/30 or 80/20 decision. Yes it is a free, because Feeney leads with the shoulder and should only do that when the other player is leading with his shoulder. But while Feeney turns and sets himself up, his left foot never leaves the ground. He is actually stationary while the Vincent's player runs into him. Deliberate block or deliberate charge? Reasonable doubt in any book and no way deserving of having his season immediately ended.
To those blindly insisting that 'rules are rules', you don't mention common sense anywhere. This is the Sepp Blatter approach to refereeing, i.e. no thinking just follow my rules and imho is a very dangerous road to go down.
I don't accept that one bit. You're trying to say in some way that our player was responsible for yours getting the line which is scandalous quite frankly.
Its very clear-cut. A deliberate body check is a black card offence. There is no semantics involved. Feeney could have just stood his ground but he didn't. He eyes him up and actually makes sure he puts a lot of power behind the body check ensuring that not only does he stop the player but that's there's a fair chance he'll leave him completely winded- which he did.
I feel desperately sorry for anyone who has to leave an AI Club final after 5 minutes. I wouldn't wish it on anyone especially as I know how much last Monday would have meant to the Feeney family after the last couple of years.
But that was a hare-brained a tackle as I've seen in a long time. Referee had no option.
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 10:09:02 AM
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 09:44:41 AM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 18, 2014, 11:11:47 PM
Muppet he deliberately changes his body position to turn his shoulder into the Vincents man's chest. Mike is absolutely correct, this is the exact type of offence that the blackcard was introduced to eradicate. There was no ball to play and he shouldered him straight down the middle, the archetypal 3rd man tackle.
The Gif is very misleading as the camera, and anyone watching it, is following the ball and the Vincents player. Everything in the picture is moving from right to left, except Feeney. Thus it looks as if Feeney is the intruder in the scene. But Feeney is stationary. His left foot never leaves the ground, so the Gif doesn't do him any justice. Yes he turns his shoulder to the man. That is what most Gaa players do when there is a possibility of a collision and if the Vincent's player did the same, nothing would have happened. However the Vincent's player, who is clearly looking straight at Feeney, and who is the one moving, continues straight into Feeney.
That is why I am calling it a 70/30 or 80/20 decision. Yes it is a free, because Feeney leads with the shoulder and should only do that when the other player is leading with his shoulder. But while Feeney turns and sets himself up, his left foot never leaves the ground. He is actually stationary while the Vincent's player runs into him. Deliberate block or deliberate charge? Reasonable doubt in any book and no way deserving of having his season immediately ended.
To those blindly insisting that 'rules are rules', you don't mention common sense anywhere. This is the Sepp Blatter approach to refereeing, i.e. no thinking just follow my rules and imho is a very dangerous road to go down.
I don't accept that one bit. You're trying to say in some way that our player was responsible for yours getting the line which is scandalous quite frankly.
Its very clear-cut. A deliberate body check is a black card offence. There is no semantics involved. Feeney could have just stood his ground but he didn't. He eyes him up and actually makes sure he puts a lot of power behind the body check ensuring that not only does he stop the player but that's there's a fair chance he'll leave him completely winded- which he did.
I feel desperately sorry for anyone who has to leave an AI Club final after 5 minutes. I wouldn't wish it on anyone especially as I know how much last Monday would have meant to the Feeney family after the last couple of years.
But that was a hare-brained a tackle as I've seen in a long time. Referee had no option.
This all sounds great, but Feeney was stationary. His left foot never leaves the ground. Look at it again. The moving player is the one with all the momentum (the power as you call it). And I am not scandalously saying anything about your player. One is running and one is stationary. Who runs into who? He also 'eyes him up' as you put it. Feeney simply turns to meet him with his shoulder. Admittedly the elbow comes up afterwards which makes it look worse.
Can't see how its not a black card all day long. Feeney makes the movement and readys himself for the hit.
When we had a ref in giving us a talk on new rules one of the signs he said for a deliberate block off the ball was the offending player tensing himself to give the hit ie he will naturally protect himself to give/take the hit. You can see that Feeney does that and changes direction to meet the Vincents player.
Hard on Feeney but he can't have any complaints.
Feeney has tweeted an apology and said he made a big mistake. There is no argument, even from the player himself. Muppet, please take note.
Muppet as hardstation said his right foot leaves the ground and not only that but he turned his shoulder into him deliberately. He took him out plain and simple. It was stupid and reckless and Feeney knows he did wrong. There is no way whatsoever to lay any responsibility on the door of the Vinccents player. He had no opportunity to avoid the clash as Feeney turned into him, clear as day. If Feeney had turned to follow the ball he would have still delayed him without getting the black card. There is no ambiguity here at all in my view and jest about everyone else's.
Muppet has a point.
How do we know that gif wasn't photoshopped anyway?
Quote from: orangeman on March 19, 2014, 10:04:10 AM
I've watched a lot of games recently and I would say that it depends to a fair degree on the referee.
I've seen referees almost not paying any heed to the new black card rule. I've seen refs giving a yellow card in lieu of a black. I've seen refs giving black cards for mistimed tackles where there was no intention of deliberately dragging down a player. And I've seen refs doing it properly but I would have to say that they're in the minority.
So I wouldn't agree that it's difficult to get a black card. Far from it.
I may have missed certain matches or match discussions you are referring to, but overall I read a lot more fans giving out about people not getting black cards than about people getting black cards.
There will always be exceptions, but from the games I've watched and read about, refs are tending not to give black cards unless absolutely sure its warranted.
Quote from: Hound on March 19, 2014, 11:06:54 AM
Quote from: orangeman on March 19, 2014, 10:04:10 AM
I've watched a lot of games recently and I would say that it depends to a fair degree on the referee.
I've seen referees almost not paying any heed to the new black card rule. I've seen refs giving a yellow card in lieu of a black. I've seen refs giving black cards for mistimed tackles where there was no intention of deliberately dragging down a player. And I've seen refs doing it properly but I would have to say that they're in the minority.
So I wouldn't agree that it's difficult to get a black card. Far from it.
I may have missed certain matches or match discussions you are referring to, but overall I read a lot more fans giving out about people not getting black cards than about people getting black cards.
There will always be exceptions, but from the games I've watched and read about, refs are tending not to give black cards unless absolutely sure its warranted.
Without doubt, in the few games I've been involved with the refs are the last people looking to give a black card. I was chatting to one at HT of the game and asked him how he was finding the new rules and he said it was too early in the year for black cards and laughed.
Quote from: Bingo on March 19, 2014, 11:11:24 AM
Quote from: Hound on March 19, 2014, 11:06:54 AM
Quote from: orangeman on March 19, 2014, 10:04:10 AM
I've watched a lot of games recently and I would say that it depends to a fair degree on the referee.
I've seen referees almost not paying any heed to the new black card rule. I've seen refs giving a yellow card in lieu of a black. I've seen refs giving black cards for mistimed tackles where there was no intention of deliberately dragging down a player. And I've seen refs doing it properly but I would have to say that they're in the minority.
So I wouldn't agree that it's difficult to get a black card. Far from it.
I may have missed certain matches or match discussions you are referring to, but overall I read a lot more fans giving out about people not getting black cards than about people getting black cards.
There will always be exceptions, but from the games I've watched and read about, refs are tending not to give black cards unless absolutely sure its warranted.
Without doubt, in the few games I've been involved with the refs are the last people looking to give a black card. I was chatting to one at HT of the game and asked him how he was finding the new rules and he said it was too early in the year for black cards and laughed.
Meaning not championship or being assessed, watch the difference
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 10:17:20 AM
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 10:09:02 AM
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 09:44:41 AM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 18, 2014, 11:11:47 PM
Muppet he deliberately changes his body position to turn his shoulder into the Vincents man's chest. Mike is absolutely correct, this is the exact type of offence that the blackcard was introduced to eradicate. There was no ball to play and he shouldered him straight down the middle, the archetypal 3rd man tackle.
The Gif is very misleading as the camera, and anyone watching it, is following the ball and the Vincents player. Everything in the picture is moving from right to left, except Feeney. Thus it looks as if Feeney is the intruder in the scene. But Feeney is stationary. His left foot never leaves the ground, so the Gif doesn't do him any justice. Yes he turns his shoulder to the man. That is what most Gaa players do when there is a possibility of a collision and if the Vincent's player did the same, nothing would have happened. However the Vincent's player, who is clearly looking straight at Feeney, and who is the one moving, continues straight into Feeney.
That is why I am calling it a 70/30 or 80/20 decision. Yes it is a free, because Feeney leads with the shoulder and should only do that when the other player is leading with his shoulder. But while Feeney turns and sets himself up, his left foot never leaves the ground. He is actually stationary while the Vincent's player runs into him. Deliberate block or deliberate charge? Reasonable doubt in any book and no way deserving of having his season immediately ended.
To those blindly insisting that 'rules are rules', you don't mention common sense anywhere. This is the Sepp Blatter approach to refereeing, i.e. no thinking just follow my rules and imho is a very dangerous road to go down.
I don't accept that one bit. You're trying to say in some way that our player was responsible for yours getting the line which is scandalous quite frankly.
Its very clear-cut. A deliberate body check is a black card offence. There is no semantics involved. Feeney could have just stood his ground but he didn't. He eyes him up and actually makes sure he puts a lot of power behind the body check ensuring that not only does he stop the player but that's there's a fair chance he'll leave him completely winded- which he did.
I feel desperately sorry for anyone who has to leave an AI Club final after 5 minutes. I wouldn't wish it on anyone especially as I know how much last Monday would have meant to the Feeney family after the last couple of years.
But that was a hare-brained a tackle as I've seen in a long time. Referee had no option.
This all sounds great, but Feeney was stationary. His left foot never leaves the ground. Look at it again. The moving player is the one with all the momentum (the power as you call it). And I am not scandalously saying anything about your player. One is running and one is stationary. Who runs into who? He also 'eyes him up' as you put it. Feeney simply turns to meet him with his shoulder. Admittedly the elbow comes up afterwards which makes it look worse.
You are fast losing any remaining credibility, there is nothing to see here. Stupid tackle, [which RF has even admitted himself]deliberately stepped into the man and made sure he hit him as hard as he could, a black card offence all day long, you're ,making a complete fool of yourself prolonging this argument.
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 19, 2014, 11:14:47 AM
Quote from: Bingo on March 19, 2014, 11:11:24 AM
Quote from: Hound on March 19, 2014, 11:06:54 AM
Quote from: orangeman on March 19, 2014, 10:04:10 AM
I've watched a lot of games recently and I would say that it depends to a fair degree on the referee.
I've seen referees almost not paying any heed to the new black card rule. I've seen refs giving a yellow card in lieu of a black. I've seen refs giving black cards for mistimed tackles where there was no intention of deliberately dragging down a player. And I've seen refs doing it properly but I would have to say that they're in the minority.
So I wouldn't agree that it's difficult to get a black card. Far from it.
I may have missed certain matches or match discussions you are referring to, but overall I read a lot more fans giving out about people not getting black cards than about people getting black cards.
There will always be exceptions, but from the games I've watched and read about, refs are tending not to give black cards unless absolutely sure its warranted.
Without doubt, in the few games I've been involved with the refs are the last people looking to give a black card. I was chatting to one at HT of the game and asked him how he was finding the new rules and he said it was too early in the year for black cards and laughed.
Meaning not championship or being assessed, watch the difference
That's the difference alright MR.
There'll be crack in the summer.
Quote from: orangeman on March 19, 2014, 11:43:30 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 19, 2014, 11:14:47 AM
Quote from: Bingo on March 19, 2014, 11:11:24 AM
Quote from: Hound on March 19, 2014, 11:06:54 AM
Quote from: orangeman on March 19, 2014, 10:04:10 AM
I've watched a lot of games recently and I would say that it depends to a fair degree on the referee.
I've seen referees almost not paying any heed to the new black card rule. I've seen refs giving a yellow card in lieu of a black. I've seen refs giving black cards for mistimed tackles where there was no intention of deliberately dragging down a player. And I've seen refs doing it properly but I would have to say that they're in the minority.
So I wouldn't agree that it's difficult to get a black card. Far from it.
I may have missed certain matches or match discussions you are referring to, but overall I read a lot more fans giving out about people not getting black cards than about people getting black cards.
There will always be exceptions, but from the games I've watched and read about, refs are tending not to give black cards unless absolutely sure its warranted.
Without doubt, in the few games I've been involved with the refs are the last people looking to give a black card. I was chatting to one at HT of the game and asked him how he was finding the new rules and he said it was too early in the year for black cards and laughed.
Meaning not championship or being assessed, watch the difference
That's the difference alright MR.
There'll be crack in the summer.
Need to apply it from start, at least the players (who you've refereed) will know you will be pulling players up for this, season looming and as a referee I ain't looking forward to it, I'll be doing mainly hurling games but did a right few football games last year. Will be called all sorts again no doubt lol
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 19, 2014, 11:56:35 AM
Quote from: orangeman on March 19, 2014, 11:43:30 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 19, 2014, 11:14:47 AM
Quote from: Bingo on March 19, 2014, 11:11:24 AM
Quote from: Hound on March 19, 2014, 11:06:54 AM
Quote from: orangeman on March 19, 2014, 10:04:10 AM
I've watched a lot of games recently and I would say that it depends to a fair degree on the referee.
I've seen referees almost not paying any heed to the new black card rule. I've seen refs giving a yellow card in lieu of a black. I've seen refs giving black cards for mistimed tackles where there was no intention of deliberately dragging down a player. And I've seen refs doing it properly but I would have to say that they're in the minority.
So I wouldn't agree that it's difficult to get a black card. Far from it.
I may have missed certain matches or match discussions you are referring to, but overall I read a lot more fans giving out about people not getting black cards than about people getting black cards.
There will always be exceptions, but from the games I've watched and read about, refs are tending not to give black cards unless absolutely sure its warranted.
Without doubt, in the few games I've been involved with the refs are the last people looking to give a black card. I was chatting to one at HT of the game and asked him how he was finding the new rules and he said it was too early in the year for black cards and laughed.
Meaning not championship or being assessed, watch the difference
That's the difference alright MR.
There'll be crack in the summer.
Need to apply it from start, at least the players (who you've refereed) will know you will be pulling players up for this, season looming and as a referee I ain't looking forward to it, I'll be doing mainly hurling games but did a right few football games last year. Will be called all sorts again no doubt lol
Verbal abuse of the referee is a black offence you know ;)
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 19, 2014, 10:50:35 AM
Muppet as hardstation said his right foot leaves the ground and not only that but he turned his shoulder into him deliberately. He took him out plain and simple. It was stupid and reckless and Feeney knows he did wrong. There is no way whatsoever to lay any responsibility on the door of the Vinccents player. He had no opportunity to avoid the clash as Feeney turned into him, clear as day. If Feeney had turned to follow the ball he would have still delayed him without getting the black card. There is no ambiguity here at all in my view and jest about everyone else's.
BC fair play as you are about the only one here who is actually reading what I am saying and debating it.
Yes his right foot leaves the ground and yes he turns his shoulder deliberately. No dispute. But the Gif is misleading. Feeney doesn't move his position on the pitch. You say if Feeney had turned to follow the ball he would have still delayed him. I agree. But he would still have been in the same spot on the field and the collision would still have occurred.
By leading with the shoulder and not ensuring he met a shoulder, that is a free against him. The reason I think his other foot doesn't leave the ground is that he, mistakenly, is setting himself up for a fair shoulder to shoulder hit which requires one foot on the ground. As I said the elbow coming up after makes it look worse. Obviously he got that wrong and the Vincent's player don't meet him with the shoulder.
I agree with muppet, it's a yellow and not a black for me though I can understand why the ref issued the black.
Feeney and the Vins player would have collide as long as Fenney stood his ground, as he is entitled to. All Feeney did was turn his shoulder to the oncoming player and to do that he had to move his feet from parallel to a split stance. That is a yellow card foul and not a black IMO though it is hard to defend Feeney as what he did was daft and risked getting himself either booked or black carded for no gain to his team. On that basis I'd have little sympathy for him but I'd have given a yellow.
Feeney had no reason to expect the Vincents player to shoulder him. He didn't run at him from yards away, he played the ball and was following the ball with his vision and wasn't focused on Feeney. Absolutely no reason why he would be turning his shoulder only to stop the run of the vincents player.
Its a black and is exactly what the rule is set up for. If the refs are doing a talk on the rules, they'd use it as an example, its that clear.
If the Vincents player had the ball and Feeney stopped him like he did, it would be a yellow card. He didn't have the ball and his challenge was to stop the run, he had movement to make the hit and wasn't just a case of standing his ground. Black card.
Quote from: Bingo on March 19, 2014, 10:26:03 AM
Can't see how its not a black card all day long. Feeney makes the movement and readys himself for the hit.
When we had a ref in giving us a talk on new rules one of the signs he said for a deliberate block off the ball was the offending player tensing himself to give the hit ie he will naturally protect himself to give/take the hit. You can see that Feeney does that and changes direction to meet the Vincents player.
Hard on Feeney but he can't have any complaints.
This is interesting as most players will tense themselves when a player runs into them. A player bracing himself is hardly a sure sign of intent. It can often be a reflex. Basketballer defenders are typically very disciplined to stand open, take the hit in the chest and win the foul. But it is rare enough in Gaa.
Quote from: Bingo on March 19, 2014, 01:35:54 PM
Feeney had no reason to expect the Vincents player to shoulder him. He didn't run at him from yards away, he played the ball and was following the ball with his vision and wasn't focused on Feeney. Absolutely no reason why he would be turning his shoulder only to stop the run of the vincents player.
Its a black and is exactly what the rule is set up for. If the refs are doing a talk on the rules, they'd use it as an example, its that clear.
If the Vincents player had the ball and Feeney stopped him like he did, it would be a yellow card. He didn't have the ball and his challenge was to stop the run, he had movement to make the hit and wasn't just a case of standing his ground. Black card.
Do you accept that Feeney remained in the same position on the pitch?
Quote from: moysider on March 18, 2014, 11:52:34 PM
Quote from: Dinny Breen on March 18, 2014, 11:42:10 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 18, 2014, 11:00:31 PM
Poor Tom Humphries used to write a lot about Vincents before the demons took over.
f**k him!
Thought that a bit of a strange one too seafoid. Why the sympathy?
It's like George Best drinking it away, I think. He had so much talent and he lost it.
Very sad story.
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 01:37:21 PM
Quote from: Bingo on March 19, 2014, 01:35:54 PM
Feeney had no reason to expect the Vincents player to shoulder him. He didn't run at him from yards away, he played the ball and was following the ball with his vision and wasn't focused on Feeney. Absolutely no reason why he would be turning his shoulder only to stop the run of the vincents player.
Its a black and is exactly what the rule is set up for. If the refs are doing a talk on the rules, they'd use it as an example, its that clear.
If the Vincents player had the ball and Feeney stopped him like he did, it would be a yellow card. He didn't have the ball and his challenge was to stop the run, he had movement to make the hit and wasn't just a case of standing his ground. Black card.
Do you accept that Feeney remained in the same position on the pitch?
Either way it was a daft thing to do as it's in the hands of a referee who is refereeing the biggest match of the calendar year, (so far) with all the Croke Park officials watching. In that split second of watching it (and he had a great view) decide on yellow or black? He doesn't have the replay or anything else to help him there. I'd say Pat would have black carded him for that also I've no doubt over that.
Would Castlebar have won the match had he stayed? Don't know, they would have had a better chance though
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 19, 2014, 01:54:29 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 01:37:21 PM
Quote from: Bingo on March 19, 2014, 01:35:54 PM
Feeney had no reason to expect the Vincents player to shoulder him. He didn't run at him from yards away, he played the ball and was following the ball with his vision and wasn't focused on Feeney. Absolutely no reason why he would be turning his shoulder only to stop the run of the vincents player.
Its a black and is exactly what the rule is set up for. If the refs are doing a talk on the rules, they'd use it as an example, its that clear.
If the Vincents player had the ball and Feeney stopped him like he did, it would be a yellow card. He didn't have the ball and his challenge was to stop the run, he had movement to make the hit and wasn't just a case of standing his ground. Black card.
Do you accept that Feeney remained in the same position on the pitch?
Either way it was a daft thing to do as it's in the hands of a referee who is refereeing the biggest match of the calendar year, (so far) with all the Croke Park officials watching. In that split second of watching it (and he had a great view) decide on yellow or black? He doesn't have the replay or anything else to help him there. I'd say Pat would have black carded him for that also I've no doubt over that.
Would Castlebar have won the match had he stayed? Don't know, they would have had a better chance though
I am not having a go at the ref here. It is the rule and the apparent complete lack of latitude for common sense.
The ref would have been following the ball and it would have looked to him like Feeney travelled 5 years to deliver his hit, just like it does at first glance on the Gif.
I am merely suggesting that this was not a 100% call.
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 01:57:57 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 19, 2014, 01:54:29 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 01:37:21 PM
Quote from: Bingo on March 19, 2014, 01:35:54 PM
Feeney had no reason to expect the Vincents player to shoulder him. He didn't run at him from yards away, he played the ball and was following the ball with his vision and wasn't focused on Feeney. Absolutely no reason why he would be turning his shoulder only to stop the run of the vincents player.
Its a black and is exactly what the rule is set up for. If the refs are doing a talk on the rules, they'd use it as an example, its that clear.
If the Vincents player had the ball and Feeney stopped him like he did, it would be a yellow card. He didn't have the ball and his challenge was to stop the run, he had movement to make the hit and wasn't just a case of standing his ground. Black card.
Do you accept that Feeney remained in the same position on the pitch?
Either way it was a daft thing to do as it's in the hands of a referee who is refereeing the biggest match of the calendar year, (so far) with all the Croke Park officials watching. In that split second of watching it (and he had a great view) decide on yellow or black? He doesn't have the replay or anything else to help him there. I'd say Pat would have black carded him for that also I've no doubt over that.
Would Castlebar have won the match had he stayed? Don't know, they would have had a better chance though
I am not having a go at the ref here. It is the rule and the apparent complete lack of latitude for common sense.
The ref would have been following the ball and it would have looked to him like Feeney travelled 5 years to deliver his hit, just like it does at first glance on the Gif.
I am merely suggesting that this was not a 100% call.
If you look at it the referee is watching the tackle and didn't follow the ball, and to be fair to him he was very close
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 01:37:21 PM
Quote from: Bingo on March 19, 2014, 01:35:54 PM
Feeney had no reason to expect the Vincents player to shoulder him. He didn't run at him from yards away, he played the ball and was following the ball with his vision and wasn't focused on Feeney. Absolutely no reason why he would be turning his shoulder only to stop the run of the vincents player.
Its a black and is exactly what the rule is set up for. If the refs are doing a talk on the rules, they'd use it as an example, its that clear.
If the Vincents player had the ball and Feeney stopped him like he did, it would be a yellow card. He didn't have the ball and his challenge was to stop the run, he had movement to make the hit and wasn't just a case of standing his ground. Black card.
Do you accept that Feeney remained in the same position on the pitch?
No, he moved his right foot across his left to make the hit. If he didn't the vincents player could have bypassed him outside his standing left foot, moving his right foot across his body put him into a new position and his only focus was to make the hit.
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 01:36:13 PM
Quote from: Bingo on March 19, 2014, 10:26:03 AM
Can't see how its not a black card all day long. Feeney makes the movement and readys himself for the hit.
When we had a ref in giving us a talk on new rules one of the signs he said for a deliberate block off the ball was the offending player tensing himself to give the hit ie he will naturally protect himself to give/take the hit. You can see that Feeney does that and changes direction to meet the Vincents player.
Hard on Feeney but he can't have any complaints.
This is interesting as most players will tense themselves when a player runs into them. A player bracing himself is hardly a sure sign of intent. It can often be a reflex. Basketballer defenders are typically very disciplined to stand open, take the hit in the chest and win the foul. But it is rare enough in Gaa.
It was in the context of moving towards a player to make a hit, you will brace yourself to protect yourself. The decision has been made to make the hit and the body is getting reading for that, a very natural instinct but avoiding a challenge is more natural. Both refs I've seen giving the talk has mentioned this. A basketball players stance would be a good example of standing your ground, a basketball playing can't step into the way of player and make such a block. He has to be stationery in advance of the hit ie the player could avoid him but didn't.
Quote from: Bingo on March 19, 2014, 02:02:58 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 01:37:21 PM
Quote from: Bingo on March 19, 2014, 01:35:54 PM
Feeney had no reason to expect the Vincents player to shoulder him. He didn't run at him from yards away, he played the ball and was following the ball with his vision and wasn't focused on Feeney. Absolutely no reason why he would be turning his shoulder only to stop the run of the vincents player.
Its a black and is exactly what the rule is set up for. If the refs are doing a talk on the rules, they'd use it as an example, its that clear.
If the Vincents player had the ball and Feeney stopped him like he did, it would be a yellow card. He didn't have the ball and his challenge was to stop the run, he had movement to make the hit and wasn't just a case of standing his ground. Black card.
Do you accept that Feeney remained in the same position on the pitch?
No, he moved his right foot across his left to make the hit. If he didn't the vincents player could have bypassed him outside his standing left foot, moving his right foot across his body put him into a new position and his only focus was to make the hit.
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 01:36:13 PM
Quote from: Bingo on March 19, 2014, 10:26:03 AM
Can't see how its not a black card all day long. Feeney makes the movement and readys himself for the hit.
When we had a ref in giving us a talk on new rules one of the signs he said for a deliberate block off the ball was the offending player tensing himself to give the hit ie he will naturally protect himself to give/take the hit. You can see that Feeney does that and changes direction to meet the Vincents player.
Hard on Feeney but he can't have any complaints.
This is interesting as most players will tense themselves when a player runs into them. A player bracing himself is hardly a sure sign of intent. It can often be a reflex. Basketballer defenders are typically very disciplined to stand open, take the hit in the chest and win the foul. But it is rare enough in Gaa.
It was in the context of moving towards a player to make a hit, you will brace yourself to protect yourself. The decision has been made to make the hit and the body is getting reading for that, a very natural instinct but avoiding a challenge is more natural. Both refs I've seen giving the talk has mentioned this. A basketball players stance would be a good example of standing your ground, a basketball playing can't step into the way of player and make such a block. He has to be stationery in advance of the hit ie the player could avoid him but didn't.
I meant Feeney's exact position on the pitch. It doesn't change. He just pivots on his left foot. If, as BC suggests, he had pivoted more and faced away from the player, the collision would still have occurred.
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 02:07:23 PM
I meant Feeney's exact position on the pitch. It doesn't change. He just pivots on his left foot. If, as BC suggests, he had pivoted more and faced away from the player, the collision would still have occurred.
I would say it did, his right foot is on opposition side of his left when the vincents player played the ball.
If he done a lot of things it would have been different. But he didn't, he put his right foot across to meet the vincents player and stop his run. If he had turned fully and the vincents playerran into back of him it would have been different but If is a fine would and will change any situation.
His right foot totally changes his body shape and position and the intention of doing so is to make the hit.
Quote from: Bingo on March 19, 2014, 02:16:35 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 02:07:23 PM
I meant Feeney's exact position on the pitch. It doesn't change. He just pivots on his left foot. If, as BC suggests, he had pivoted more and faced away from the player, the collision would still have occurred.
I would say it did, his right foot is on opposition side of his left when the vincents player played the ball.
If he done a lot of things it would have been different. But he didn't, he put his right foot across to meet the vincents player and stop his run. If he had turned fully and the vincents playerran into back of him it would have been different but If is a fine would and will change any situation.
His right foot totally changes his body shape and position and the intention of doing so is to make the hit.
And here is where we differ. The collision was inevitable in my opinion, Feeney decided to make it a shoulder. A free yes. A yellow, maybe, but that may be harsh in the first 5 minutes (think Tadhg Kenelly). But as the collision was inevitable, or at least debatably so, it isn't a nailed on black card for me.
This has legs but I don't think it'll be as long as the Cork hurlers thread
Pretty Clear Feeney took the man out . its exactly the type of fouls it was introduced for .
The only fustration is when Similar tackles are let go
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 02:21:40 PM
Quote from: Bingo on March 19, 2014, 02:16:35 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 02:07:23 PM
I meant Feeney's exact position on the pitch. It doesn't change. He just pivots on his left foot. If, as BC suggests, he had pivoted more and faced away from the player, the collision would still have occurred.
I would say it did, his right foot is on opposition side of his left when the vincents player played the ball.
If he done a lot of things it would have been different. But he didn't, he put his right foot across to meet the vincents player and stop his run. If he had turned fully and the vincents playerran into back of him it would have been different but If is a fine would and will change any situation.
His right foot totally changes his body shape and position and the intention of doing so is to make the hit.
And here is where we differ. The collision was inevitable in my opinion, Feeney decided to make it a shoulder. A free yes. A yellow, maybe, but that may be harsh in the first 5 minutes (think Tadhg Kenelly). But as the collision was inevitable, or at least debatably so, it isn't a nailed on black card for me.
If its a free its a black card. The only way it wasn't a black card is if it was a collision - i don't think it was, Feeney moved into it rather than stand his ground. The only way it was a yellow card was that if the vincents player had the ball still and was shoulder charged.
It's clear as day. I think Feeney just forgot himself for a second and followed through as used to happen very regularly (or most of the match as Mayo tried to get back into the AIF a few years ago against Donegal).
I'm glad that the 3rd man tackle has been scrapped! Not that I'm putting Feeney in the same bracket but the last time I did the cruciate I was soloing up the pitch and saw the man lining me up... I hand passed the ball off and he ploughed into me while the foot was planted. I'm pretty sure the ref just gave a free and the man didn't even get booked for it. If the black card rule was in force I doubt your man would have done the same thing!
Quote from: rosnarun on March 19, 2014, 02:24:53 PM
Pretty Clear Feeney took the man out . its exactly the type of fouls it was introduced for .
The only fustration is when Similar tackles are let go
+1.
Muppet needs to take off the Castlebar/Rhu glasses.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 19, 2014, 02:43:35 PM
Quote from: rosnarun on March 19, 2014, 02:24:53 PM
Pretty Clear Feeney took the man out . its exactly the type of fouls it was introduced for .
The only fustration is when Similar tackles are let go
+1.
Muppet needs to take off the Castlebar/Rhu glasses.
I for one was a little taken aback by the black card as I thought it wasn't in operation. But it seems it was and therefore Feeney deserved to go. What I don't understand was about 2-5 minutes later a Vincents man took a Mitchels player down by hanging out of his neck with no card shown.
Feeney just forgot about the black card if you ask me and was playing under the old rules. There is forward motion towards the Vincents player and he 100% went to block him. A tough, tough lesson for him and Castlebar.
Quote from: rosnarun on March 19, 2014, 02:24:53 PM
Pretty Clear Feeney took the man out . its exactly the type of fouls it was introduced for .
The only fustration is when Similar tackles are let go
There were quite a few let go after the Feeney card which was more frustrating than Feeney actually getting one.
This particular milk is now spilt.
However, I expect to see a lot of this in the coming summer.
The risk reward for the defender makes this a no brainer.
Run towards your opposite number and offload the pass late making a collision likely. If your opponent braces, as described by the ref that spoke to Bingo: "one of the signs he said for a deliberate block off the ball was the offending player tensing himself to give the hit ie he will naturally protect himself to give/take the hit". Thus if the other player tenses himself for the hit he might get a black card. Even though he doesn't move and you run into him.
The risk for the defender is, at most, a free against you that few refs would give, especially if you don't lead with the shoulder and take the hit on your own chest. But the reward is a black card against your opponent if you get it right.
So, who's the only gay in the village St Vincent's team?
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 03:19:35 PM
This particular milk is now spilt.
However, I expect to see a lot of this in the coming summer.
The risk reward for the defender makes this a no brainer.
Run towards your opposite number and offload the pass late making a collision likely. If your opponent braces, as described by the ref that spoke to Bingo: "one of the signs he said for a deliberate block off the ball was the offending player tensing himself to give the hit ie he will naturally protect himself to give/take the hit". Thus if the other player tenses himself for the hit he might get a black card. Even though he doesn't move and you run into him.
The risk for the defender is, at most, a free against you that few refs would give, especially if you don't lead with the shoulder and take the hit on your own chest. But the reward is a black card against your opponent if you get it right.
Spot on, Muppet. I didn't know, but I'm not surprised that they gave that particular directive. Lads should have perfected their "finding someone to be blocked by" technique by Championship time.
You shouldn't get a black card for that though and the referee at the course I attended supported that interpretation.
Lads, I can't believe what I'm seeing here. The Vincent's lad played the ball and made a support run. Feeney deliberately took him out of the play. It's quite obvious he did it, and if he's tweeting to that effect then I can't even understand why this is for debate.
I tell you this, if THAT incident is deemed debatable then the whole black card is banjaxed.
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 19, 2014, 03:46:00 PM
Lads, I can't believe what I'm seeing here. The Vincent's lad played the ball and made a support run. Feeney deliberately took him out of the play. It's quite obvious he did it, and if he's tweeting to that effect then I can't even understand why this is for debate.
I tell you this, if THAT incident is deemed debatable then the whole black card is banjaxed.
How can you be so certain of that ?.
Quote from: seafoid on March 19, 2014, 02:22:24 PM
This has legs but I don't think it'll be as long as the Cork hurlers thread
I think we can hit 50 pages here at least.
LOL
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 19, 2014, 03:46:00 PM
Lads, I can't believe what I'm seeing here. The Vincent's lad played the ball and made a support run. Feeney deliberately took him out of the play. It's quite obvious he did it, and if he's tweeting to that effect then I can't even understand why this is for debate.
I tell you this, if THAT incident is deemed debatable then the whole black card is banjaxed.
Only one person is debating whether it is a black card really though.
Quote from: BennyCake on March 19, 2014, 03:30:34 PM
So, who's the only gay in the village St Vincent's team?
A stab at the ignorant rugby oaf a couple of weeks back who let himself down in relation to homosexuals and sport that use alot of ball work
Quote from: imtommygunn on March 19, 2014, 03:55:46 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 19, 2014, 03:46:00 PM
Lads, I can't believe what I'm seeing here. The Vincent's lad played the ball and made a support run. Feeney deliberately took him out of the play. It's quite obvious he did it, and if he's tweeting to that effect then I can't even understand why this is for debate.
I tell you this, if THAT incident is deemed debatable then the whole black card is banjaxed.
Only one person is debating whether it is a black card really though.
Reillers was on his own as well! It was a black card offence in my eyes. Tough on Feeney though all the same.
Quote from: BennyCake on March 19, 2014, 03:30:34 PM
So, who's the only gay in the village St Vincent's team?
pray god theres no homo's playing gaelic fudball or we're all doomed!! ::)
stats wise, there is prob a minimum 3 /4 gay men in each club. High time this was embraced
Quote from: J OGorman on March 19, 2014, 04:24:33 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on March 19, 2014, 03:30:34 PM
So, who's the only gay in the village St Vincent's team?
pray god theres no homo's playing gaelic fudball or we're all doomed!! ::)
stats wise, there is prob a minimum 3 /4 gay men in each club. High time this was embraced
Oh matron!!
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 19, 2014, 03:46:00 PM
Lads, I can't believe what I'm seeing here. The Vincent's lad played the ball and made a support run. Feeney deliberately took him out of the play. It's quite obvious he did it, and if he's tweeting to that effect then I can't even understand why this is for debate.
I tell you this, if THAT incident is deemed debatable then the whole black card is banjaxed.
Feeney's tweet reflects the sort of guy he is.
Quote from: J OGorman on March 19, 2014, 04:24:33 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on March 19, 2014, 03:30:34 PM
So, who's the only gay in the village St Vincent's team?
pray god theres no homo's playing gaelic fudball or we're all doomed!! ::)
stats wise, there is prob a minimum 3 /4 gay men in each club. High time this was embraced
Is this a double entendre or do I have to give you one?
Quote from: moysider on March 19, 2014, 04:36:43 PM
Quote from: J OGorman on March 19, 2014, 04:24:33 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on March 19, 2014, 03:30:34 PM
So, who's the only gay in the village St Vincent's team?
pray god theres no homo's playing gaelic fudball or we're all doomed!! ::)
stats wise, there is prob a minimum 3 /4 gay men in each club. High time this was embraced
Is this a double entendre or do I have to give you one?
its all about give and take Moy
Quote from: J OGorman on March 19, 2014, 04:41:51 PM
Quote from: moysider on March 19, 2014, 04:36:43 PM
Quote from: J OGorman on March 19, 2014, 04:24:33 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on March 19, 2014, 03:30:34 PM
So, who's the only gay in the village St Vincent's team?
pray god theres no homo's playing gaelic fudball or we're all doomed!! ::)
stats wise, there is prob a minimum 3 /4 gay men in each club. High time this was embraced
Is this a double entendre or do I have to give you one?
its all about give and take Moy
B
oy George!
Quote from: J OGorman on March 19, 2014, 04:24:33 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on March 19, 2014, 03:30:34 PM
So, who's the only gay in the village St Vincent's team?
pray god theres no homo's playing gaelic fudball or we're all doomed!! ::)
stats wise, there is prob a minimum 3 /4 gay men in each club. High time this was embraced
Are you saying they are three quarters of a man or 3 or 4 men?
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on March 19, 2014, 04:48:52 PM
Quote from: J OGorman on March 19, 2014, 04:24:33 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on March 19, 2014, 03:30:34 PM
So, who's the only gay in the village St Vincent's team?
pray god theres no homo's playing gaelic fudball or we're all doomed!! ::)
stats wise, there is prob a minimum 3 /4 gay men in each club. High time this was embraced
Are you saying they are three quarters of a man or 3 or 4 men?
depends on his state of arousal
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 03:19:35 PM
This particular milk is now spilt.
However, I expect to see a lot of this in the coming summer.
The risk reward for the defender makes this a no brainer.
Run towards your opposite number and offload the pass late making a collision likely. If your opponent braces, as described by the ref that spoke to Bingo: "one of the signs he said for a deliberate block off the ball was the offending player tensing himself to give the hit ie he will naturally protect himself to give/take the hit". Thus if the other player tenses himself for the hit he might get a black card. Even though he doesn't move and you run into him.
The risk for the defender is, at most, a free against you that few refs would give, especially if you don't lead with the shoulder and take the hit on your own chest. But the reward is a black card against your opponent if you get it right.
You're not listening or just picking at parts. I said also that there should be movement towards the player, this makes it deliberate, a player bracing to ensure he doesn't get injured is also evidence of deliberate.
A player passing the ball and then colliding when it was unavoidable isn't deliberate and isn't a black card.
A defender attempt to achieve an advantage by feigning a foul or injury is also open to a yellow card and refs are talking about these offences as well in their briefings.
Quote from: Bingo on March 19, 2014, 05:03:11 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 03:19:35 PM
This particular milk is now spilt.
However, I expect to see a lot of this in the coming summer.
The risk reward for the defender makes this a no brainer.
Run towards your opposite number and offload the pass late making a collision likely. If your opponent braces, as described by the ref that spoke to Bingo: "one of the signs he said for a deliberate block off the ball was the offending player tensing himself to give the hit ie he will naturally protect himself to give/take the hit". Thus if the other player tenses himself for the hit he might get a black card. Even though he doesn't move and you run into him.
The risk for the defender is, at most, a free against you that few refs would give, especially if you don't lead with the shoulder and take the hit on your own chest. But the reward is a black card against your opponent if you get it right.
You're not listening or just picking at parts. I said also that there should be movement towards the player, this makes it deliberate, a player bracing to ensure he doesn't get injured is also evidence of deliberate.
A player passing the ball and then colliding when it was unavoidable isn't deliberate and isn't a black card.
A defender attempt to achieve an advantage by feigning a foul or injury is also open to a yellow card and refs are talking about these offences as well in their briefings.
I agree with the first part but not the second. A player bracing to ensure he doesn't get injured, is only evidence that he doesn't want to get injured. If is a reflex.
If Mathieu Mastereaud is running at you, believe me you will brace. That doesn't mean you have deliberately tried to take him out. ;D
If he was running towards me, I'd be running elsewhere, never mind your brace. :D
Its like everything it will be open to interpetation by the ref. To me I can understand what he is saying regards the brace and Feeney is a prime example of someone reading for a hit rather than to protect himself. Its actually a no brainer to me and is similar to the clip of Tommy Freeman that they are using in the briefing - shoulder into chest of player who has played the ball.
We'll see alot more carrying on and nonsense on this rule in the summer - no doubt on that. Brace yourself for it ;)
Quote from: Bingo on March 19, 2014, 05:25:40 PM
If he was running towards me, I'd be running elsewhere, never mind your brace. :D
Its like everything it will be open to interpetation by the ref. To me I can understand what he is saying regards the brace and Feeney is a prime example of someone reading for a hit rather than to protect himself. Its actually a no brainer to me and is similar to the clip of Tommy Freeman that they are using in the briefing - shoulder into chest of player who has played the ball.
We'll see alot more carrying on and nonsense on this rule in the summer - no doubt on that. Brace yourself for it ;)
I would, but I might get sanctioned!
Looked like a black card when I saw it on Sunday and still looks that way having watched it again, awful tough on Feeney but winning Sam next Sept will ease the pain a bit :-P
Thought Durcan & Lydon were v good for Castlebar, Durcan worth an invite into the county squad imo along with the three other county players. Durcan may not make the hb line but he's good competition there. What age is Lydon??
Thought Barry was wasted in FF for too long. Cunniffe should have been moved onto Connolly, may not have been enough but should have been tried.
Congrats to Vincents
Richie Feeney @RichieF5 Mar 18
Let my teammate's down big time. Nothing but regrets. Have to find a way to make up for it now. #MitchelsAbu
If Feeney had any interest other than body checking the oncoming Vincent's player he would have been turning in the opposite direction to the one he did.
Anyone arguing the semantics of the rule with regard to this incident is missing the point:
Look at the gif. See what happens in it? That's the EXACT thing the rule is meant to punish. The only argument to be had (and tbh it's nonsense to think there is one in this case) is whether or not the rule describes exactly what happens in the GIF because that's exactly what it's meant to punish. The rule could as well be a copy of this gif stating "See image - this is a black card".
Quote from: J OGorman on March 19, 2014, 04:24:33 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on March 19, 2014, 03:30:34 PM
So, who's the only gay in the village St Vincent's team?
pray god theres no homo's playing gaelic fudball or we're all doomed!! ::)
stats wise, there is prob a minimum 3 /4 gay men in each club. High time this was embraced
There's probably a few sheepshaggers, cross dressers and doggers in each club too, but you don't hear much about embracing their lifestyle choices.
Quote from: Keane on March 19, 2014, 06:52:21 PM
If Feeney had any interest other than body checking the oncoming Vincent's player he would have been turning in the opposite direction to the one he did.
Anyone arguing the semantics of the rule with regard to this incident is missing the point:
Look at the gif. See what happens in it? That's the EXACT thing the rule is meant to punish. The only argument to be had (and tbh it's nonsense to think there is one in this case) is whether or not the rule describes exactly what happens in the GIF because that's exactly what it's meant to punish. The rule could as well be a copy of this gif stating "See image - this is a black card".
QuoteIt was literally one of the dumbest things I've ever seen anyone do on a football pitch.
Quoteyet because some moron gets himself sent off for one in the first few minutes of a big game we're lamenting the rules
QuoteI guarantee you we won't be seeing too many repeats of Feeney's stupidity
Quoteit just shows such a bad attitude
Someone like you who absolutely castigates an amateur player, that you know nothing about, anonymously on a public forum is not worth debating with.
Quote from: BennyCake on March 19, 2014, 06:59:59 PM
Quote from: J OGorman on March 19, 2014, 04:24:33 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on March 19, 2014, 03:30:34 PM
So, who's the only gay in the village St Vincent's team?
pray god theres no homo's playing gaelic fudball or we're all doomed!! ::)
stats wise, there is prob a minimum 3 /4 gay men in each club. High time this was embraced
There's probably a few sheepshaggers, cross dressers and doggers in each club too, but you don't hear much about embracing their lifestyle choices.
Feck sake Benny, just chill out and not go turbo again.
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 07:01:17 PM
Quote from: Keane on March 19, 2014, 06:52:21 PM
If Feeney had any interest other than body checking the oncoming Vincent's player he would have been turning in the opposite direction to the one he did.
Anyone arguing the semantics of the rule with regard to this incident is missing the point:
Look at the gif. See what happens in it? That's the EXACT thing the rule is meant to punish. The only argument to be had (and tbh it's nonsense to think there is one in this case) is whether or not the rule describes exactly what happens in the GIF because that's exactly what it's meant to punish. The rule could as well be a copy of this gif stating "See image - this is a black card".
QuoteIt was literally one of the dumbest things I've ever seen anyone do on a football pitch.
Quoteyet because some moron gets himself sent off for one in the first few minutes of a big game we're lamenting the rules
QuoteI guarantee you we won't be seeing too many repeats of Feeney's stupidity
Quoteit just shows such a bad attitude
Someone like you who absolutely castigates an amateur player, that you know nothing about, anonymously on a public forum is not worth debating with.
Really, I wouldn't have expected anything else.
And my name is David Keane, my club is Kerins O'Rahillys in Tralee and I live in Ranelagh.
I would be very surprised if Feeney took any particular exception to my description of his idiotic tackle, which he has mentioned himself let his team down.
Quote from: Keane on March 19, 2014, 07:06:11 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 07:01:17 PM
Quote from: Keane on March 19, 2014, 06:52:21 PM
If Feeney had any interest other than body checking the oncoming Vincent's player he would have been turning in the opposite direction to the one he did.
Anyone arguing the semantics of the rule with regard to this incident is missing the point:
Look at the gif. See what happens in it? That's the EXACT thing the rule is meant to punish. The only argument to be had (and tbh it's nonsense to think there is one in this case) is whether or not the rule describes exactly what happens in the GIF because that's exactly what it's meant to punish. The rule could as well be a copy of this gif stating "See image - this is a black card".
QuoteIt was literally one of the dumbest things I've ever seen anyone do on a football pitch.
Quoteyet because some moron gets himself sent off for one in the first few minutes of a big game we're lamenting the rules
QuoteI guarantee you we won't be seeing too many repeats of Feeney's stupidity
Quoteit just shows such a bad attitude
Someone like you who absolutely castigates an amateur player, that you know nothing about, anonymously on a public forum is not worth debating with.
Really, I wouldn't have expected anything else.
And my name is David Keane, my club is Kerins O'Rahillys in Tralee and I live in Ranelagh.
I would be very surprised if Feeney took any particular exception to my description of his idiotic tackle, which he has mentioned himself let his team down.
The irony of you criticising him for playing the man, by constantly playing the man, is obviously completely lost on you.
Like I said, not worth debating with someone who castigates an amateur player the way you did publicly.
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 05:14:28 PM
Quote from: Bingo on March 19, 2014, 05:03:11 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 03:19:35 PM
This particular milk is now spilt.
However, I expect to see a lot of this in the coming summer.
The risk reward for the defender makes this a no brainer.
Run towards your opposite number and offload the pass late making a collision likely. If your opponent braces, as described by the ref that spoke to Bingo: "one of the signs he said for a deliberate block off the ball was the offending player tensing himself to give the hit ie he will naturally protect himself to give/take the hit". Thus if the other player tenses himself for the hit he might get a black card. Even though he doesn't move and you run into him.
The risk for the defender is, at most, a free against you that few refs would give, especially if you don't lead with the shoulder and take the hit on your own chest. But the reward is a black card against your opponent if you get it right.
You're not listening or just picking at parts. I said also that there should be movement towards the player, this makes it deliberate, a player bracing to ensure he doesn't get injured is also evidence of deliberate.
A player passing the ball and then colliding when it was unavoidable isn't deliberate and isn't a black card.
A defender attempt to achieve an advantage by feigning a foul or injury is also open to a yellow card and refs are talking about these offences as well in their briefings.
I agree with the first part but not the second. A player bracing to ensure he doesn't get injured, is only evidence that he doesn't want to get injured. If is a reflex.
If Mathieu Mastereaud is running at you, believe me you will brace. That doesn't mean you have deliberately tried to take him out. ;D
Bastareaud doesn't run, he strides and leaves carbon footprints in his wake.
Would a Feeny brace do much to stop Bastareaud in his stride?
I guess refs are just going to have to discriminate between an organic coming together, the simulator and the malicious brace.
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on March 19, 2014, 07:03:46 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on March 19, 2014, 06:59:59 PM
Quote from: J OGorman on March 19, 2014, 04:24:33 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on March 19, 2014, 03:30:34 PM
So, who's the only gay in the village St Vincent's team?
pray god theres no homo's playing gaelic fudball or we're all doomed!! ::)
stats wise, there is prob a minimum 3 /4 gay men in each club. High time this was embraced
There's probably a few sheepshaggers, cross dressers and doggers in each club too, but you don't hear much about embracing their lifestyle choices.
Feck sake Benny, just chill out and not go turbo again.
Exactly. ..was only being a bit tongue in cheeks :-)
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 03:19:35 PM
This particular milk is now spilt.
However, I expect to see a lot of this in the coming summer.
The risk reward for the defender makes this a no brainer.
Run towards your opposite number and offload the pass late making a collision likely. If your opponent braces, as described by the ref that spoke to Bingo: "one of the signs he said for a deliberate block off the ball was the offending player tensing himself to give the hit ie he will naturally protect himself to give/take the hit". Thus if the other player tenses himself for the hit he might get a black card. Even though he doesn't move and you run into him.
The risk for the defender is, at most, a free against you that few refs would give, especially if you don't lead with the shoulder and take the hit on your own chest. But the reward is a black card against your opponent if you get it right.
What I find hilarious at this point is that based on your theories you'd swear the Vincents player had committed an offence and was responsible for getting the line.
And somehow this instance where he's utterly blameless will somehow be construed by teams in the summer to use to their advantage to get opposing players black cards.
You really couldn't make this up.
How did Connolly behave at the celebrations? Any jaws broken?
Quote from: Jonah on March 19, 2014, 08:40:25 PM
How did Connolly behave at the celebrations? Any jaws broken?
Only jaws broken were the ones of our begrudgers hitting the floor when they saw the sheer genius of his second goal and saying to themselves
" We don't have players in our county who can do that"
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 08:46:52 PM
Quote from: Jonah on March 19, 2014, 08:40:25 PM
How did Connolly behave at the celebrations? Any jaws broken?
Only jaws broken were the ones of our begrudgers hitting the floor when they saw the sheer genius of his second goal and saying to themselves
" We don't have players in our county who can do that"
More of a hurling man meself to be honest so I don't care about who you have to score goals.
Quote from: Jonah on March 19, 2014, 08:40:25 PM
How did Connolly behave at the celebrations? Any jaws broken?
He without sin cast the first stone
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 08:46:52 PM
Quote from: Jonah on March 19, 2014, 08:40:25 PM
How did Connolly behave at the celebrations? Any jaws broken?
Only jaws broken were the ones of our begrudgers hitting the floor when they saw the sheer genius of his second goal and saying to themselves
" We don't have players in our county who can do that"
He lost the ball, though. Poor ball protection. 10 laps of whatever expensive spaceship Dublin players use for training.
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 08:38:00 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 03:19:35 PM
This particular milk is now spilt.
However, I expect to see a lot of this in the coming summer.
The risk reward for the defender makes this a no brainer.
Run towards your opposite number and offload the pass late making a collision likely. If your opponent braces, as described by the ref that spoke to Bingo: "one of the signs he said for a deliberate block off the ball was the offending player tensing himself to give the hit ie he will naturally protect himself to give/take the hit". Thus if the other player tenses himself for the hit he might get a black card. Even though he doesn't move and you run into him.
The risk for the defender is, at most, a free against you that few refs would give, especially if you don't lead with the shoulder and take the hit on your own chest. But the reward is a black card against your opponent if you get it right.
What I find hilarious at this point is that based on your theories you'd swear the Vincents player had committed an offence and was responsible for getting the line.
And somehow this instance where he's utterly blameless will somehow be construed by teams in the summer to use to their advantage to get opposing players black cards.
You really couldn't make this up.
Put your ludicrous paranoia away. I congratulated Vincent's on a totally deserved victory and nowhere have I suggested that anyone got Feeney sent off. Nowhere have I suggested the Vincent's player committed an offence.
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 08:46:52 PM
Quote from: Jonah on March 19, 2014, 08:40:25 PM
How did Connolly behave at the celebrations? Any jaws broken?
Only jaws broken were the ones of our begrudgers hitting the floor when they saw the sheer genius of his second goal and saying to themselves
" We don't have players in our county who can do that"
I think most peoples jaws were dropping in amazement that he got away with all those steps.
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 09:27:13 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 08:38:00 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 03:19:35 PM
This particular milk is now spilt.
However, I expect to see a lot of this in the coming summer.
The risk reward for the defender makes this a no brainer.
Run towards your opposite number and offload the pass late making a collision likely. If your opponent braces, as described by the ref that spoke to Bingo: "one of the signs he said for a deliberate block off the ball was the offending player tensing himself to give the hit ie he will naturally protect himself to give/take the hit". Thus if the other player tenses himself for the hit he might get a black card. Even though he doesn't move and you run into him.
The risk for the defender is, at most, a free against you that few refs would give, especially if you don't lead with the shoulder and take the hit on your own chest. But the reward is a black card against your opponent if you get it right.
What I find hilarious at this point is that based on your theories you'd swear the Vincents player had committed an offence and was responsible for getting the line.
And somehow this instance where he's utterly blameless will somehow be construed by teams in the summer to use to their advantage to get opposing players black cards.
You really couldn't make this up.
Put your ludicrous paranoia away. I congratulated Vincent's on a totally deserved victory and nowhere have I suggested that anyone got Feeney sent off. Nowhere have I suggested the Vincent's player committed an offence.
You've implied at every god damn juncture. Ludicrous paranoia? Have a look in the mirror
Quote from: Jonah on March 19, 2014, 08:50:14 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 08:46:52 PM
Quote from: Jonah on March 19, 2014, 08:40:25 PM
How did Connolly behave at the celebrations? Any jaws broken?
Only jaws broken were the ones of our begrudgers hitting the floor when they saw the sheer genius of his second goal and saying to themselves
" We don't have players in our county who can do that"
More of a hurling man meself to be honest so I don't care about who you have to score goals.
My advice would be to stick to hurling then
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 09:52:38 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 09:27:13 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 08:38:00 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 19, 2014, 03:19:35 PM
This particular milk is now spilt.
However, I expect to see a lot of this in the coming summer.
The risk reward for the defender makes this a no brainer.
Run towards your opposite number and offload the pass late making a collision likely. If your opponent braces, as described by the ref that spoke to Bingo: "one of the signs he said for a deliberate block off the ball was the offending player tensing himself to give the hit ie he will naturally protect himself to give/take the hit". Thus if the other player tenses himself for the hit he might get a black card. Even though he doesn't move and you run into him.
The risk for the defender is, at most, a free against you that few refs would give, especially if you don't lead with the shoulder and take the hit on your own chest. But the reward is a black card against your opponent if you get it right.
What I find hilarious at this point is that based on your theories you'd swear the Vincents player had committed an offence and was responsible for getting the line.
And somehow this instance where he's utterly blameless will somehow be construed by teams in the summer to use to their advantage to get opposing players black cards.
You really couldn't make this up.
Put your ludicrous paranoia away. I congratulated Vincent's on a totally deserved victory and nowhere have I suggested that anyone got Feeney sent off. Nowhere have I suggested the Vincent's player committed an offence.
You've implied at every god damn juncture. Ludicrous paranoia? Have a look in the mirror
You are defending your club mate from 'implied' accusations, ones that I am not making in any form. For the record, again, I am not accusing Bonnie of any offence. None, nada, zip.
Quote from: BennyCake on March 19, 2014, 09:49:05 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 08:46:52 PM
Quote from: Jonah on March 19, 2014, 08:40:25 PM
How did Connolly behave at the celebrations? Any jaws broken?
Only jaws broken were the ones of our begrudgers hitting the floor when they saw the sheer genius of his second goal and saying to themselves
" We don't have players in our county who can do that"
I think most peoples jaws were dropping in amazement that he got away with all those steps.
Oisin ??????
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 09:53:21 PM
Quote from: Jonah on March 19, 2014, 08:50:14 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 08:46:52 PM
Quote from: Jonah on March 19, 2014, 08:40:25 PM
How did Connolly behave at the celebrations? Any jaws broken?
Only jaws broken were the ones of our begrudgers hitting the floor when they saw the sheer genius of his second goal and saying to themselves
" We don't have players in our county who can do that"
More of a hurling man meself to be honest so I don't care about who you have to score goals.
My advice would be to stick to hurling then
I didn't ask for your advice.
Quote from: Jonah on March 19, 2014, 10:31:51 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 09:53:21 PM
Quote from: Jonah on March 19, 2014, 08:50:14 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 08:46:52 PM
Quote from: Jonah on March 19, 2014, 08:40:25 PM
How did Connolly behave at the celebrations? Any jaws broken?
Only jaws broken were the ones of our begrudgers hitting the floor when they saw the sheer genius of his second goal and saying to themselves
" We don't have players in our county who can do that"
More of a hurling man meself to be honest so I don't care about who you have to score goals.
My advice would be to stick to hurling then
I didn't ask for your advice.
I didn't charge you for it.
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 10:47:48 PM
Quote from: Jonah on March 19, 2014, 10:31:51 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 09:53:21 PM
Quote from: Jonah on March 19, 2014, 08:50:14 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 08:46:52 PM
Quote from: Jonah on March 19, 2014, 08:40:25 PM
How did Connolly behave at the celebrations? Any jaws broken?
Only jaws broken were the ones of our begrudgers hitting the floor when they saw the sheer genius of his second goal and saying to themselves
" We don't have players in our county who can do that"
More of a hurling man meself to be honest so I don't care about who you have to score goals.
My advice would be to stick to hurling then
I didn't ask for your advice.
I didn't charge you for it.
If you did charge, he'd be black carded. ;D
Sorry just had to do that.
I just love a bit of black humour.
This Jonah chap is a real card.
I m sure Jonah would have no problem whaling into somebody himself.
Er...... maybe I ve got that a bit mixed up!
Quote from: squire_in_navy_slacks on March 19, 2014, 10:24:01 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on March 19, 2014, 09:49:05 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 08:46:52 PM
Quote from: Jonah on March 19, 2014, 08:40:25 PM
How did Connolly behave at the celebrations? Any jaws broken?
Only jaws broken were the ones of our begrudgers hitting the floor when they saw the sheer genius of his second goal and saying to themselves
" We don't have players in our county who can do that"
I think most peoples jaws were dropping in amazement that he got away with all those steps.
Oisin ??????
Nope, it was definitely Diarmuid Connolly.
Quote from: BennyCake on March 20, 2014, 12:37:20 AM
Quote from: squire_in_navy_slacks on March 19, 2014, 10:24:01 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on March 19, 2014, 09:49:05 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on March 19, 2014, 08:46:52 PM
Quote from: Jonah on March 19, 2014, 08:40:25 PM
How did Connolly behave at the celebrations? Any jaws broken?
Only jaws broken were the ones of our begrudgers hitting the floor when they saw the sheer genius of his second goal and saying to themselves
" We don't have players in our county who can do that"
I think most peoples jaws were dropping in amazement that he got away with all those steps.
Oisin ??????
Nope, it was definitely Diarmuid Connolly.
Different final but by feck he took some steps that day, won me a tenner double that day (paid 150), Portumna in the final (I think, I took the handicap) and a draw in the football, Cross game was on first, I was hammered by half time in the second game!!