Antrim Football Thread

[Take the Mark]

Of course the full compliment won't be at all the games this year - only an imbecile would think or expect them to be. I believe the previous poster was giving credit where its due.

I'd agree - whilst it is quite difficult for us spectators to grasp the reasoning behind every indiscretion it was good to see the officials seemed well clued in on the new game and (from my understanding) ran the game by the book and didn't decide to make their own version of the rules as will be the case with some refs.

[Milltown Row2]

Of course the full compliment won't be at all the games this year - only an imbecile would think or expect them to be. I believe the previous poster was giving credit where its due.

I'd agree - whilst it is quite difficult for us spectators to grasp the reasoning behind every indiscretion it was good to see the officials seemed well clued in on the new game and (from my understanding) ran the game by the book and didn't decide to make their own version of the rules as will be the case with some refs.

Because you can run it by the book when you have the help, plus with more impending changes that seem to be in the making, it will leave supporters/players and management scratching their heads when the refs with their own versions come along

[Take the Mark]

'it's my judgement call to decide on people talking back'


You don't need 'the help' when you are bringing 'my judgement call' into players talking back. You have already made 1 rule for 1 and another rule for another with that shout 

[Milltown Row2]

'it's my judgement call to decide on people talking back'


You don't need 'the help' when you are bringing 'my judgement call' into players talking back. You have already made 1 rule for 1 and another rule for another with that shout 

Your view on dissent is yours, mine is mine, not difficult to understand? maybe an imbecile would think that

[Take the Mark]

'Only the team captain — or a nominated player if the captain is no longer on the pitch — may speak to the referee for clarification on a decision.'

Thats the rule - but go you ahead and make yer own up, the more things change the more they stay the same 

[Dunsilly King]

well, this is interesting. I was talking to a prominent club manager recently and we were discussing this rule. He was very clear, he had spoken to a current intercounty ref who explained- the intercounty refs meet via teams/zoom almost after each weekend to discuss the new rules, they have accepted that the captain and the player fouled can ask the ref questions-but its the manner in which they do this that will decide if the ref applies a penalty i.e. coming up to a ref and asking respectfully what was that foul was for verses shouting at a ref from 5/10 metres away are two different ways of doing it. Its obvious which one the ref will punish.

[Milltown Row2]

well, this is interesting. I was talking to a prominent club manager recently and we were discussing this rule. He was very clear, he had spoken to a current intercounty ref who explained- the intercounty refs meet via teams/zoom almost after each weekend to discuss the new rules, they have accepted that the captain and the player fouled can ask the ref questions-but its the manner in which they do this that will decide if the ref applies a penalty i.e. coming up to a ref and asking respectfully what was that foul was for verses shouting at a ref from 5/10 metres away are two different ways of doing it. Its obvious which one the ref will punish.

Nah, can't be true sure your man knows his stuff

[Round or stuffed]

so has anyone any idea when fixtures will be released to the public?

[Lucifer]

'it's my judgement call to decide on people talking back'


You don't need 'the help' when you are bringing 'my judgement call' into players talking back. You have already made 1 rule for 1 and another rule for another with that shout 

What do you actually want?  As soon as any other player outside of the captain opens their mouth just call it for dissent?  That will take out any judgement ... but it's an entirely preposterous scenario for anyone with common sense.  "Ah ref" or "WTF did you give that for" will become one and the same.  But if the fouling player loudly declares to his own teammate "Hey Paul, I didn't foul him but the ref doesn't have a clue" then this isn't dissent as it isn't a strict application of the definition of the rule as you seem to want.

How about we just use common sense, eh?

[SaffronSports]

'it's my judgement call to decide on people talking back'


You don't need 'the help' when you are bringing 'my judgement call' into players talking back. You have already made 1 rule for 1 and another rule for another with that shout 

What do you actually want?  As soon as any other player outside of the captain opens their mouth just call it for dissent?  That will take out any judgement ... but it's an entirely preposterous scenario for anyone with common sense.  "Ah ref" or "WTF did you give that for" will become one and the same.  But if the fouling player loudly declares to his own teammate "Hey Paul, I didn't foul him but the ref doesn't have a clue" then this isn't dissent as it isn't a strict application of the definition of the rule as you seem to want.

How about we just use common sense, eh?

Is there consistency in common sense? If not, then apply the rule as it's written. This is the very thing that will have refs getting abuse. The ref last week applied "common sense", this week he's not letting me away with what the last one did. Consistency is what is needed from referees not a group of lads with different tolerance levels deciding what is and isn't appropriate.

[Take the Mark]

Consistency - 1 million percent. And this is not possible if every man is making up their own rules on what can and what can't be said. There is consistency in this county though, unfortunately of the negative variety. 'group of lads' - couldnt have said it better myself. Good post.

[Milltown Row2]

There is no consistency because the rules have changed so much since this has started

But hey ho lets just stick to zero tolerance, any vocal dissent of any kind from the pitch to the sideline will be met with a 50m free

2 weeks away from the fireworks

[Take the Mark]

I watched a competitive game last night reffed to the rule, not a firework in sight. But then there were no rockets present.

[InnocentByStander]

There is no consistency because the rules have changed so much since this has started

But hey ho lets just stick to zero tolerance, any vocal dissent of any kind from the pitch to the sideline will be met with a 50m free

2 weeks away from the fireworks

Can a free be given for dissent if no foul is given?

if someone see's a challenge as a foul that the ref doesn't give and that person gives verbal abuse to the ref can the ref give a free?

Or is it only dissent after fouls?

[Milltown Row2]

There is no consistency because the rules have changed so much since this has started

But hey ho lets just stick to zero tolerance, any vocal dissent of any kind from the pitch to the sideline will be met with a 50m free

2 weeks away from the fireworks

Can a free be given for dissent if no foul is given?

if someone see's a challenge as a foul that the ref doesn't give and that person gives verbal abuse to the ref can the ref give a free?

Or is it only dissent after fouls?

You could always stop play give a yellow card and depending on who had the ball either give it a hop ball or non direct free. But think I heard one's saying frees can be overturned? Again from games I've done or watched it's changed from one ref to the next, and that's on the national stage