Messages

Can anyone explain to me why the 'new' screening fouls are not being treated as black card offences?
Shurely, they satisfy the black card infringement criteria of
- To deliberately collide with an opponent after he has played the ball away or for the purpose of taking him out of the movement of play

Fine line between deliberately taking out an opponent and you being there and not being able to magically disappear 

But surely if it's a foul it must be a black card?
Unless referees are saying that these screening offences are 'accidental' collisions?

Your spot on.

Was thinking that myself last weekend.

And another thing....


Why do referees never give black cards for contributing to a melee?

Referee called a black for one today. Other referees have blatantly ignored it. 

The one today I thought was a foul the other way. It looked like Duffy plays the ball as he is turning. He makes no further movement towards his opponent other than bracing for impact and his opponent collides with him but comes off worse.

Obviously if Duffy did make a movement towards his opponent that's different but it doesn't look that way to me

I thought that was a comfortable win for Armagh who didn't get or need to get out of second gear. Will need to improve for the next day but have plenty of room and time to. Always hard to get up again after an Ulster final.

I thought the referee was poor as well.

Have they done this recently, say this season? I know they did in past, but the appeals that followed often overturned much of it.

The honest issue is I am not sure how we would know.  I have been involved in a few appeals over the years stemming from CCCC sanctions but none in the last 18 months.  That doesnt mean there havent been some I just have no personal knowledge

On hindsight Brennan been shafted here. He def deserved a 3 match ban but 3 months in a reduced county season does not make sense. McGuinness at least a match ban, Burns should get 3 months, but he get a month or a 2 match ban. Clifford looks bad on freeze frame but show it on 5/7 sec, lead up and after, more a forearm than a elbow. Donegal lad has a think about it, then goes down quicker than Trump under fire!

My understanding there is only the one sanction available under the current rules which is 12 weeks. It is that or nothing under the current rules. Brennan was carded during the game which is also different from the weekend. It is apples and oranges. It appears the CCCC don't want to look at anything not in refs report and it is only them and the refs who know what is in the reports. The difference here is no cards for Jim or David were shown on the day and so case closed. The GAA need to expand sanctions available for non players on the pitch, look at rules for who is allowed inside the pitch and see if a citing process like rugby should be used. All of these are not possible under the current rules.

To the contrary the statement to me suggests that they did want to look at it but because it was in the refs report they by rule could not consider it any further

I should have said can't instead of don't want to

The issue is that the rules are such that the CCCC are supposed to intervene when the officials on the day miss something.

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/gaelic-games/2026/05/26/mcguinness-and-clifford-getting-off-scot-free-is-a-bad-look-for-the-gaas-disciplinary-process/

The decision not to pursue disciplinary action against Jim McGuinness or David Clifford for incidents that occurred during the Kerry-Donegal game in Killarney on Saturday have nothing to do with the evidence of our eyes and the massive audience those incidents reached over the weekend. It's not as if these things didn't happen, all of a sudden. This decision is about the GAA's disciplinary system.

Neither McGuinness nor Clifford were sanctioned on the day by referee Seán Hurson for the offences they committed: McGuinness pushed a Kerry player, Diarmuid O'Connor, while Clifford led with his elbow into the neck area of a Donegal player, Caolan McGonagle.

If a referee fails to take any action, the GAA's Central Competitions Control Committee (CCCC) has the power to take the matter further. In this case, however, they evidently took the view that any proposed suspension would not survive an appeals process.

All of the match officials were on the pitch during the free-for-all that took place just after the half-time whistle. How much did each of them see? There was so much going on that it is unreasonable to believe they saw everything.

But when Hurson called McGuinness and Jack O'Connor together at the beginning of the second half it could be argued this was his way of dealing with the fracas in real time. Did he deal with it satisfactorily? Clearly not. But the CCCC can only intervene in situations not dealt with by the match officials.

Referee Seán Hurson shows Kerry's Micheál Burns a red card ahead of the second half of last weekend's All-Ireland SFC Round 1 fixture in Killarney. Photograph: James Lawlor/Inpho
Referee Seán Hurson shows Kerry's Micheál Burns a red card ahead of the second half of last weekend's All-Ireland SFC Round 1 fixture in Killarney. Photograph: James Lawlor/Inpho
The Clifford incident is harder to explain away. If it was seen by Hurson or the linesman on that side of the field, David Coldrick, the Kerry forward should have been sent off. Are we being asked to believe that they saw it and came to the conclusion that no further action should be taken? That is not credible. So, if the match officials failed to deal with it, why have the CCCC decided not to intervene? No explanation has been offered.


The make-up of the CCCC changes with each presidency, but this iteration of the committee, and its predecessor, have been notably non-interventionist. That approach has been broadly welcomed in the refereeing community where there is natural resistance to the practice of re-refereeing matches in the cold light of a committee room.

Incidents are missed every weekend. Combing through the footage of every intercounty match for mistakes made by referees is not practical or desirable. But when high-profile incidents are missed in the biggest games and not addressed later, it makes the CCCC look ineffective.

The GAA's disciplinary system is much tidier now than it was, say, 20 years ago. The advent of the Disputes Resolution Authority (DRA) has successfully blocked the path to civil courts and mercifully few of the DRA's decisions are a hard sell. But in a situation like this, the disciplinary system depends first on the CCCC having the courage to act.

Referee Fergal Kelly shows red cards to Dublin manager Ger Brennan and Galway S&C coach Cian Breathnach McGinn during a NFL game at Pearse Stadium in March. Photograph: James Crombie/Inpho
Referee Fergal Kelly shows red cards to Dublin manager Ger Brennan and Galway S&C coach Cian Breathnach McGinn during a NFL game at Pearse Stadium in March. Photograph: James Crombie/Inpho
Comparisons with the Ger Brennan incident will not magically vanish now that a jagged line has been drawn under Killarney. The Dublin manager was given a 12-week suspension for an altercation with a Galway backroom member during a National League game in Salthill. In that case, the critical difference was that Brennan was red carded by referee Fergal Kelly.

Brennan took his case all the way to the DRA, but in their judgment, they gave huge weight to the referee's report. "It has long been held in GAA disciplinary matters that a referee's report is considered to be correct in all factual matters," the ruling said. It also added that the Central Hearings Committee (CHC) had been within their rights to rely on the report "alone".

In Hurson's report from the Kerry-Donegal game there was no mention of the incidents involving McGuinness or Clifford.


Referees who have bad days out in high-profile games are often taken out of the line of fire for a while. It will be interesting to see what games Hurson is appointed to in the coming weeks.

McGuinness and Clifford have escaped censure, but Hurson may not.

Its not correct they have been non interventionist, they have been selectively interventionist which is much worse 

On hindsight Brennan been shafted here. He def deserved a 3 match ban but 3 months in a reduced county season does not make sense. McGuinness at least a match ban, Burns should get 3 months, but he get a month or a 2 match ban. Clifford looks bad on freeze frame but show it on 5/7 sec, lead up and after, more a forearm than a elbow. Donegal lad has a think about it, then goes down quicker than Trump under fire!

My understanding there is only the one sanction available under the current rules which is 12 weeks. It is that or nothing under the current rules. Brennan was carded during the game which is also different from the weekend. It is apples and oranges. It appears the CCCC don't want to look at anything not in refs report and it is only them and the refs who know what is in the reports. The difference here is no cards for Jim or David were shown on the day and so case closed. The GAA need to expand sanctions available for non players on the pitch, look at rules for who is allowed inside the pitch and see if a citing process like rugby should be used. All of these are not possible under the current rules.

To the contrary the statement to me suggests that they did want to look at it but because it was in the refs report they by rule could not consider it any further

From reading the statement it seems the CCCC wanted to intervene but couldn't because Hurson had seen both incidents and took action he deemed appropriate.

That's a rule that needs changing

Well it does but more so for how badly worded it is.  The purpose of the rule is to prevent incidents being re-refereed.  On that basis I can understand the McGuinness decision but I can't understand the original Clifford decision.

Will be interesting to see how many high profile games Hurson gets this year.  Difficult to say he got this wrong but our hands are tied and then continue to allow him to referee other matches.

I think the Hurson thing is a total cop out.

I'd say Hurson didn't see the Mc Guinness 'push' as there was plenty happening besides that.


I'd say Hurson just told the managers at the start of the second half to clear the sidelines and he was red carding the Kerry player. That was it I'd say.


Now the CCCC are using that to cop out of the other 2 decisions re: Clifford and Mc Guinness. 

They could be and I think how he is used for the rest of the summer will show that.

From reading the statement it seems the CCCC wanted to intervene but couldn't because Hurson had seen both incidents and took action he deemed appropriate.

That's a rule that needs changing

Well it does but more so for how badly worded it is.  The purpose of the rule is to prevent incidents being re-refereed.  On that basis I can understand the McGuinness decision but I can't understand the original Clifford decision.

Will be interesting to see how many high profile games Hurson gets this year.  Difficult to say he got this wrong but our hands are tied and then continue to allow him to referee other matches.

From reading the statement it seems the CCCC wanted to intervene but couldn't because Hurson had seen both incidents and took action he deemed appropriate.

Given their high profiles, and the teams ranking as number 1 and 2 in the country (debatable as to who is number 1 of course) the GAA hierarchy clearly don't want to absorb blame for either team having an early exit as a result of a manager or star player being banned. 

McGuiness, there was nothing in it of course, but he cannot take it upon himself to go around pushing opposition players, I don't care what the situation is.  Clifford the luckier of the two to get away scott free. 

The big issue here is the inconsistency being applied, as these calls reek of favoritism towards the big teams.   

No issue doing it to the eventual All Ireland champions in 2024.

Whilst I have no issue with the decision to take no action per se I think the Association would do itself a significant favour if came and said why Clifford's initial elbow was not considered a category iii infraction and why McGuinness was deemed by either the referee or the CCCC as having caused minor interference with an opponent.

Otherwise I fear claims of inconsistency and favouritism will blight the Chanpionship.

What did  we  expect McGuinness was going to say? .... Aye,  you're right. I'm fecked here .  Throw the book at me. Definitely a long  ban  coming my way, and I'll deserve it?

A polite politician style response perhaps?  This brings more attention to it.

Great game. Fair play to Cork. Some performance from Sheridan

This 'row' is a prime example of why Burns should set up an Independent Review Committee.

Then deal with stuff like this every Monday. Deal with everything the referees etc. can't deal with.

It would end this sort of waffle.

You know there is one but the rules are terribly opaque and hard to enforce resulting in spectacular inconsistency. Connaire Mackin was banned by it after Derry in 24. That was the last one I was involved in. Not sure how many there have been since.

Genuine question but with the current format are you better losing or winning this round?

I know the obvious answer is winning as it gives you two shots at making the quarterfinal but my concern is this.

If you win and we assume everyone at this stage is trying to win then you have the best teams in round 2A so it's a hard match potentially away.

Lose that you are playing the following week against a team coming off a win. You also have to play the following week again.

Alternatively if you lose the first round you have the jeopardy of straight knock out immediately but theoretically against an easier team and then you have some momentum into a preliminary quarterfinal against a team coming off a defeat the weekend before.

I can see advantages to both approaches. I think the teams playing round 1 a bit later have obviously more knowledge who is in which pot for round 2 and they may be a factor.

Lose and you're potentially facing Donegal/Kerry in a do or die game. I know what I'd rather!

True but win or lose you could find yourself facing them in successive matches having to pick yourself up after losing to one of them

My point is I'm not sure a win is as beneficial as it might be.

You could end up with 7 of the top 8 or so teams in Round 2A. So your win could be an away trip to say Kerry. Which if you lose you could have a 6 day turn around to play Donegal.

Genuine question but with the current format are you better losing or winning this round?

I know the obvious answer is winning as it gives you two shots at making the quarterfinal but my concern is this.

If you win and we assume everyone at this stage is trying to win then you have the best teams in round 2A so it's a hard match potentially away.

Lose that you are playing the following week against a team coming off a win. You also have to play the following week again.

Alternatively if you lose the first round you have the jeopardy of straight knock out immediately but theoretically against an easier team and then you have some momentum into a preliminary quarterfinal against a team coming off a defeat the weekend before.

I can see advantages to both approaches. I think the teams playing round 1 a bit later have obviously more knowledge who is in which pot for round 2 and they may be a factor.