Oops!!

[longrunsthefox]

Is that it all over now?
Let's hope so.

Send for Ferghal.

Who he?   

[David McKeown]

The DRA was introduced attempting to stop teams/players going to the courts. But AFAIK there is nothing preventing them deciding they still don't like it and heading off to the 4 Courts.

Yes, exactly my point!

Edit: I should have added "there is de facto" to my previous post

In order to avail of the DRA all parties must agree to be bound by the ruling.  Deciding to seek leave to take a court action from here would likely be met with a short shrift from the judge at the leave stage.  Consequently its highly unlikely that there would be many if any appeals eminating from the DRA.  Like wise refusing to go to the DRA would mean people would not have availed of all the avenues of appeal open to them and consequently would also make leave for a court case difficult to get.  So the DRA has in essence reduced if not eliminated the possibility of the association being brought to court

[muppet]

The DRA was introduced attempting to stop teams/players going to the courts. But AFAIK there is nothing preventing them deciding they still don't like it and heading off to the 4 Courts.

Yes, exactly my point!

Edit: I should have added "there is de facto" to my previous post

In order to avail of the DRA all parties must agree to be bound by the ruling.  Deciding to seek leave to take a court action from here would likely be met with a short shrift from the judge at the leave stage.  Consequently its highly unlikely that there would be many if any appeals eminating from the DRA.  Like wise refusing to go to the DRA would mean people would not have availed of all the avenues of appeal open to them and consequently would also make leave for a court case difficult to get.  So the DRA has in essence reduced if not eliminated the possibility of the association being brought to court

This would change my understanding of it. When I looked at the DRA website it didn't mention that rulings are binding though. Do you have a link?

[Doogie Browser]

Maybe this was up already...

[Fear ón Srath Bán]

The DRA was introduced attempting to stop teams/players going to the courts. But AFAIK there is nothing preventing them deciding they still don't like it and heading off to the 4 Courts.

Yes, exactly my point!

Edit: I should have added "there is de facto" to my previous post

In order to avail of the DRA all parties must agree to be bound by the ruling.  Deciding to seek leave to take a court action from here would likely be met with a short shrift from the judge at the leave stage.  Consequently its highly unlikely that there would be many if any appeals eminating from the DRA.  Like wise refusing to go to the DRA would mean people would not have availed of all the avenues of appeal open to them and consequently would also make leave for a court case difficult to get.  So the DRA has in essence reduced if not eliminated the possibility of the association being brought to court

Yes David, reduced but not eliminated, which is exactly what the words "think", "yet", and the acronym "QED" in my original post conveyed.

[David McKeown]

The DRA was introduced attempting to stop teams/players going to the courts. But AFAIK there is nothing preventing them deciding they still don't like it and heading off to the 4 Courts.

Yes, exactly my point!

Edit: I should have added "there is de facto" to my previous post

In order to avail of the DRA all parties must agree to be bound by the ruling.  Deciding to seek leave to take a court action from here would likely be met with a short shrift from the judge at the leave stage.  Consequently its highly unlikely that there would be many if any appeals eminating from the DRA.  Like wise refusing to go to the DRA would mean people would not have availed of all the avenues of appeal open to them and consequently would also make leave for a court case difficult to get.  So the DRA has in essence reduced if not eliminated the possibility of the association being brought to court

This would change my understanding of it. When I looked at the DRA website it didn't mention that rulings are binding though. Do you have a link?

Muppet the offical guide contains the following

Such Dispute Resolution shall be conducted in accordance with that Code and the Arbitration Acts 1954 and 1980 or any statutory modification or re-enactment thereof.  The Rules of the Association and the Laws of Ireland shall govern such Dispute Resolution.

No member or unit of the Association may issue proceedings relating to any such Dispute in any Court of Law in any jurisdiction.

When read in conjunction with the aforementioned acts, any decision of the DRA, like those of any arbitrator would have to be binding on the parties involved otherwise such a system would not work.  By choosing to engage in a DRA process both sides must have,  agreed to be bound by a tribunals decision.  Their alternative being not to contest the tribunal and accede to the wishes of he other side

Also although the second part of the official guide quote above appears to prevent any more court cases, it doesnt actually what it does is make them next to impossible to get past the leave stage and consequently pointless.

In summation the DRA has in effect for all intents and purposes (although not technically) removed the threat of court action from the association.

[muppet]

The DRA was introduced attempting to stop teams/players going to the courts. But AFAIK there is nothing preventing them deciding they still don't like it and heading off to the 4 Courts.

Yes, exactly my point!

Edit: I should have added "there is de facto" to my previous post

In order to avail of the DRA all parties must agree to be bound by the ruling.  Deciding to seek leave to take a court action from here would likely be met with a short shrift from the judge at the leave stage.  Consequently its highly unlikely that there would be many if any appeals eminating from the DRA.  Like wise refusing to go to the DRA would mean people would not have availed of all the avenues of appeal open to them and consequently would also make leave for a court case difficult to get.  So the DRA has in essence reduced if not eliminated the possibility of the association being brought to court

This would change my understanding of it. When I looked at the DRA website it didn't mention that rulings are binding though. Do you have a link?

Muppet the offical guide contains the following

Such Dispute Resolution shall be conducted in accordance with that Code and the Arbitration Acts 1954 and 1980 or any statutory modification or re-enactment thereof.  The Rules of the Association and the Laws of Ireland shall govern such Dispute Resolution.

No member or unit of the Association may issue proceedings relating to any such Dispute in any Court of Law in any jurisdiction.

When read in conjunction with the aforementioned acts, any decision of the DRA, like those of any arbitrator would have to be binding on the parties involved otherwise such a system would not work.  By choosing to engage in a DRA process both sides must have,  agreed to be bound by a tribunals decision.  Their alternative being not to contest the tribunal and accede to the wishes of he other side

Also although the second part of the official guide quote above appears to prevent any more court cases, it doesnt actually what it does is make them next to impossible to get past the leave stage and consequently pointless.

In summation the DRA has in effect for all intents and purposes (although not technically) removed the threat of court action from the association.

Thanks for that, you have provided information that I wasn't aware of and I accept that any action in light of the above would almosy certainly be futile. However court actions were usually to seek injunctions allowing a player to play in a certain match which he would have been suspended for but I agree that probably wouldn't succeed now.

BTW the statement in bold is not correct. For example the Labour Relations Commission is usually the first port of call in an Irish Labour related dispute but it's finding are very rarely binding.

[David McKeown]

The DRA was introduced attempting to stop teams/players going to the courts. But AFAIK there is nothing preventing them deciding they still don't like it and heading off to the 4 Courts.

Yes, exactly my point!

Edit: I should have added "there is de facto" to my previous post

In order to avail of the DRA all parties must agree to be bound by the ruling.  Deciding to seek leave to take a court action from here would likely be met with a short shrift from the judge at the leave stage.  Consequently its highly unlikely that there would be many if any appeals eminating from the DRA.  Like wise refusing to go to the DRA would mean people would not have availed of all the avenues of appeal open to them and consequently would also make leave for a court case difficult to get.  So the DRA has in essence reduced if not eliminated the possibility of the association being brought to court

This would change my understanding of it. When I looked at the DRA website it didn't mention that rulings are binding though. Do you have a link?

Muppet the offical guide contains the following

Such Dispute Resolution shall be conducted in accordance with that Code and the Arbitration Acts 1954 and 1980 or any statutory modification or re-enactment thereof.  The Rules of the Association and the Laws of Ireland shall govern such Dispute Resolution.

No member or unit of the Association may issue proceedings relating to any such Dispute in any Court of Law in any jurisdiction.

When read in conjunction with the aforementioned acts, any decision of the DRA, like those of any arbitrator would have to be binding on the parties involved otherwise such a system would not work.  By choosing to engage in a DRA process both sides must have,  agreed to be bound by a tribunals decision.  Their alternative being not to contest the tribunal and accede to the wishes of he other side

Also although the second part of the official guide quote above appears to prevent any more court cases, it doesnt actually what it does is make them next to impossible to get past the leave stage and consequently pointless.

In summation the DRA has in effect for all intents and purposes (although not technically) removed the threat of court action from the association.

Thanks for that, you have provided information that I wasn't aware of and I accept that any action in light of the above would almosy certainly be futile. However court actions were usually to seek injunctions allowing a player to play in a certain match which he would have been suspended for but I agree that probably wouldn't succeed now.

BTW the statement in bold is not correct. For example the Labour Relations Commission is usually the first port of call in an Irish Labour related dispute but it's finding are very rarely binding.

I was of the understanding the the LRC very rarely if at all did any arbitration and did mainly conciliation and mediation which arent binding but do bear many similarities to arbitration.  That said you can have a form on non binding arbitration but its very rare and is more like a form of independent mediation.

Yeah the interlocutory injunctions like the one Rory O Connell got (which is often credited for creating the DRA) was from memory one against the procedure used to suspend him rather than the suspension itself.  As a result of simply having a DRA such interlocutory injunctions (which require someone to show only they have an arguable case) are likely to be much harder to get nowadays.

[Onion Bag]

Harte's McMenamin hearing hope 

McMenamin was disciplined after an incident in the NFL game against Kerry
Tyrone manager Mickey Harte is hoping that Ryan McMenamin's latest appeal against his eight-week ban will be heard before this weekend.

McMenamin is preparing to appeal to the GAA's Disputes Resolution Authority.

"I would hope the appeal is this week so that he would be available to play this weekend," Harte told BBC Sport.

Philip Jordan is available for Sunday's game against Westmeath but Brian McGuigan will miss the match because he is getting married on Saturday.

Jordan missed last weekend's defeat by Galway at Healy Park because he was on holiday.

McGuigan made a shortlived return to county action in last weekend's game as he was yellow carded shortly after being introduced as a substitute.

Harte added that he is hoping that McMenamin's ban will be reduced to the "correct" duration when the DRA hears his latest appeal.

Last week, the GAA's Central Appeals Committee rejected his appeal against the two-month ban which is set to rule him out of action for four NFL matches.

If the ban was reduced to four weeks, McMenamin would be eligible to line out this weekend in Mullingar.

At the moment, McMenamin is also banned for the games against Donegal and Derry later this month.

McMenamin was disciplined when video evidence caught him grabbing opponent Paul Galvin between the legs.

The Tyrone defender came in for some scathing criticism in the media and beyond following the incident in the game at Healy Park but Harte has continued to insist that the punishment doesn't fit the crime.

Why is this still ongoing, why can Tyrone not just let it go and accept the banof 8 weeks?

[Zapatista]

just let it go Onion bag.

[irunthev]

Top teams seldom accept their punishments these days...... it's all part of the siege mentality that the managers try and instill with their players. Last year the likes of Darragh O'Se made headlines when they announced they would ACCEPT their suspensions - that's how far things have changed.  The amount of appeals that are being allowed is merely another step towards the authorities who are supposed to be running the games being undermined by those who play the games. Fair play has nothing to do with any appeal and I am sure many within Tyrone and connected with Ricey would wish the thing would be let lie, because the more it drags on the worse and worse he looks. I don't know if he is behind the appeals or whether it is just management? Players being annoyed with officialdom isn't something new, it's just that years ago, when you were caught, you said fair cop and took your punishment. Now when you are caught, teams use it as fuel to drive them on and show how everybody hates them and wants them to lose. It's amateur players and managers playing at being amateur psychologists. I'm a northerner myself, and this type of approach plays right into the persecution complex that developed north of the border for totally different reasons since the mid 1960s and earlier. The thing is now the circus has spread throughout Ireland and everyone is at it, making Croke Park's disciplinary team look very very incompetent. Would this happen in rugby...... no sir.

[ardmhachaabu]

TCB and MH are behaving like spoilt children. 

[Onion Bag]

just let it go Onion bag.

Dont think its me that needs to let it go, its Mickey Harte and co

[irunthev]

TCB and MH are behaving like spoilt children. 

Totally agree and surely Ricey's absence presents the perfect opportunity for Harte to blood some more defensive cover. If Ricey or any other player did the same in a Championship match and stood to lose him for two games then Harte would have to dig into his reserves. As it stands, in normal circumstances when all are available, Conor Gormley, Phillie, Davey Harte and Ricey start just about every game. This is the perfect chance to try out new blood for a prolonged period of time. TCB and Mickey Harte view it though as perfect time to show how much the rest of the country hates them. Gets a little tiresome after a while. Harte is a student of all this crap and he will have a specific strategy to deal with it. It's all part of his box of tricks, no doubt with that clown Bart McEnroe encouraging him.

[tyrone exile]

Here we go again........