Galvin and Finlay appeals fail

Started by Mid Mon, June 27, 2008, 01:09:58 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Maguire01

Quote from: Main Street on June 28, 2008, 11:51:53 AM
Quote from: Gnevin on June 27, 2008, 06:34:17 PM
What grounds are they appealing under apart from "We don't like it" ?
I wondered about that, do they just argue the same case in front of a different bunch of people?
Or an exhaustive futile process to search for a technicality, a missing fada.

One appeal is more than enough to proof read the documents.
A disciplinary system with 3 appeals allowed is farcical.
Displays little confidence in it's own disciplinary system.
Although the legal system has various levels of appeal that you can go through.  However, I'd assume that you would have to have new evidence or similar grounds for a appeal, rather than just not liking the outcome.

johnpower

Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on June 27, 2008, 10:32:25 PM
Quote from: Kerry Mike on June 27, 2008, 08:01:36 PM
Time to move on now, there is lots of football to be played yet this year.

Fair dues KM, such as it goes, I couldn't see it being reduced, and I don't believe there's a technicality that will result in a commutation of this particular penalty, DRA or no!
All players must now take note: transgress at your peril.


We will wait and see ?

bigpaul

Quote from: Main Street on June 28, 2008, 11:51:53 AM
Quote from: Gnevin on June 27, 2008, 06:34:17 PM
What grounds are they appealing under apart from "We don't like it" ?
I wondered about that, do they just argue the same case in front of a different bunch of people?
Or an exhaustive futile process to search for a technicality, a missing fada.

One appeal is more than enough to proof read the documents.
A disciplinary system with 3 appeals allowed is farcical.
Displays little confidence in it's own disciplinary system.

My understanding of the disciplinary process leads me to believe that this was Paul Galvin's first appeal. The suspension is proposed by the first committee and can be accepted by the player or he can elect for a hearing,where the suspension can be confirmed,lessened or lengthened.He can then appeal the suspension, if unsuccessful he has the option of going to 'final arbitration' (the supreme court) in the form of the DRA. Have to say that the system seems to be working pretty well so far, altough I personally thought that it was going to be a fiasco.I always thought that natural justice should dictate that Ross Carr should have had his suspension overturned(if he believed he was speaking 'off the record') he could not be seen to be publicly criticising a referee.Hvae to say, as an Armagh man, I was impressed by Ross at the Q&A session in the Canal Court - he certainly didn't come across as someone given to off the cuff remarks that would be thrown open to public scrutiny at a later date. My opinionof him was greatly enhanced by hearing him speak in person.
   As for Paul Galvin's suspension, I think it is just about right. If he had knocked the referee's notebook out of his hands and the immediately apologised, then a minimum suspension of three months would obviously be appropriate. However, he then abused the linesman and was on his way back to the referee before being restrained by Tomas Se. If the minimum is three months, then Paul Galvin obviously deserved more, the rights and wrongs of the officials' decision have no bearing on the disciplinary action(if he was to be given mitigation because the officials erred, then every player could call witnesses to state that they were 'hard done by') otherwie it would be open season on 'playing officials'.



Maguire01

Quote from: bigpaul on June 29, 2008, 12:28:22 AM
   As for Paul Galvin's suspension, I think it is just about right. If he had knocked the referee's notebook out of his hands and the immediately apologised, then a minimum suspension of three months would obviously be appropriate. However, he then abused the linesman and was on his way back to the referee before being restrained by Tomas Se.
I think you have a point.  If, after knocking the notebook out of the ref's hand, he had picked up the notebook and handed it back to the ref, then left the field, the Bomber could have said it was an accident. Oh, wait...

Tyrone Dreamer

Quote from: Tyrone Dreamer on June 27, 2008, 08:13:22 PM
Galvin is a big loss for Kerry, as is Declan O'Sullivan. People were basically saying Kerry were close to unbeatable this year but I think they'll fall short of doing the 3 in a row. I predict a semi final exit.

I think we saw today just what a miss them players were in the half forward line. Looks like Dara O'Se might struggle with the pace of games to. Pressure definatley on Kerry.

Maguire01

Maybe they just don't have the depth of a panel this year as in previous years.