Antrim Hurling

[Nemo]

i agree that a small dig in the back is a very cowardly act, but wether it warrants a suspension im not sure, but when two players react like i saw in the video, one hitting with force enough to break his stick then that does warrant a suspension.

i would prefer none of this went on at all, but i also wish supporters and club officials would take responsility for the actions of their players when it comes to incidents like this instead of blaming everyone else around them.

[anailís]

i agree that a small dig in the back is a very cowardly act, but wether it warrants a suspension im not sure, but when two players react like i saw in the video, one hitting with force enough to break his stick then that does warrant a suspension.

i would prefer none of this went on at all, but i also wish supporters and club officials would take responsility for the actions of their players when it comes to incidents like this instead of blaming everyone else around them.

I agree with you Nemo. As someone from Loughgiel told me, they probably had no intention of appealing the Skinner incident until the North Antrim video case brought it all up again. Since he was mentioned within that video evidence, his case was suddenly relevant. But don't you agree that when championship fever comes around every year, clubs lose their perspective on what is morally right and wrong, and look to get their strongest team out, come what may.

From a personal point of view, i think that if clubs didn't appeal suspensions then eventually word would get back to the players not to be rash on the field.
That high-mindedness though is tempered by the fact that referees can make mistakes, and that not everyone thinks the games should be played within the rules at all times.
Human nature makes certain people react more than others, in an ideal world no one would hit dirty, and no one would react, then referees would have a great job!
We all can dream. (Sounds a bit boring though....)

[NAG1]

anailis

I have watched the video of the game and I have to say the rose tinted glasses must be on, the dunloy number 5 did butt using the hurl. However to try and use that as an excuse for what followed is weak in any language. Now dont get me wrong Im not saying that he was correct to do it in anyway and if the ref had seen it then it should have been a yellow card.

But for the opposing player to wait to he had his back turned and then actually hit him that hard from behind that he broke his own hurl then I believe the suspension should have stood.

What I am saying is that if they used the video to suspend him then it should have stood on the second one I am not sure as to what the player was suspended for in the incident so I am unable to say of they were right to suspend him or subsequently let him off.

[wino]

I think you are all missing the point - the hearings committee threw out Paul Gillans case as proper procedure was not followed. And in a more serious development someone who is supposed to be neutral and fair when representing North Antrim deliberately tried to mislead the hearings committee - this is something that should not be tolerated - he is supposed to be a top ref and administrator, looks like his career may be put on hold for a while.
Secondly, bringing video evidence into local games is a dangerous development - how many matches could we not pick something up - does that mean all games should be recorded and watched closely afterwards - to me if this happens then the great sport of hurling will become less attractive for our young men as they will go to other sports.
Who decided to use the evidence in North Antrim? and for what reason? - Skinner was sent off by the ref and obviously noted in his report.  Should this not have been enough evidence for them?  Or was it that the fat controller was trying to look after his own club interests? - it wouldn't surprise me as his record of being fair and neutral isn't that great. 

[Nemo]

not another bodie crying persecution

[theskull1]

I think you are all missing the point - the hearings committee threw out Paul Gillans case as proper procedure was not followed. And in a more serious development someone who is supposed to be neutral and fair when representing North Antrim deliberately tried to mislead the hearings committee - this is something that should not be tolerated - he is supposed to be a top ref and administrator, looks like his career may be put on hold for a while.
Secondly, bringing video evidence into local games is a dangerous development - how many matches could we not pick something up - does that mean all games should be recorded and watched closely afterwards - to me if this happens then the great sport of hurling will become less attractive for our young men as they will go to other sports.
Who decided to use the evidence in North Antrim? and for what reason? - Skinner was sent off by the ref and obviously noted in his report.  Should this not have been enough evidence for them?  Or was it that the fat controller was trying to look after his own club interests? - it wouldn't surprise me as his record of being fair and neutral isn't that great. 

So ding got off on a technicality....fair enough...he's not the first and not the last...it happens and every club has benefited from administrative errors or officials not seeing everything so we should not get high and mighty this one...but he still is what he is though regardless, judging him on his behaviour over his career.
The motivations of those who tried to cite Ding need to be understood before anyone can say that what they done was more serious than what Ding was sent off for. I didn't see what he done (still waiting on someone to post the link to an online video) but they may have thought it serious enough not to let such behaviour go unpunished because they wanted to protect players and make these serial offenders think twice before they do such things again. I understand why some might think that, to some degree that motivations to push this might have been hightened by club loyalty, but we cannot say that for sure. People will have their suspicions though.

Its a very complex argument about whether video evidence should be used when it comes to administering justice and I'm not going to get into that one.

[slow corner back]

I suspect the attempt to punish Ding will have been down to his previous ( ie having a go at ref after a championship match a few years back ). refs/ administrators remember these things and will be looking for a chance for payback. I do not think it is because he is a shamrock.

[Nemo]

So lads, whats this Cushendall team like!!     

Going by what i watched on Sunday, pretty Poor

[anailís]

hatchet, do disrespect to you, but i think you will have your hands full come the weekend! what about yourselves, full squad? any injuries? is desie still playing for you, what about panzer,marty, and blondie?

[anailís]

*no disrespect to you! doh! if i could only type...

[johnneycool]

IMO the rules and guidelines as to when and how video evidence can and should be used needs to be clear and well defined so that everyone can believe that the club loyalties of administrators and referee's cannot be called into question as a motivating factor for bringing such actions.

Each county board needs to decide whether a competition will be using video evidence and if so all games within that competition would need to be video'd to ensure a level playing field for everyone.

ultimatley I believe it should be the referee who makes the final decision on whether he needs to review a video in case he's missed something. He may consult with his officials but he must make the call, not some other committee member hanging over the wire.


As for Ding Gillan having 'previous', that should not count against him (unless he's sent off for the same offence within 2 years) and each incident needs to be looked upon in isolation, but that's in an ideal world and we all carry prejudices around with us in one form or another. Referee's and officials need to ignore their 'ones to watch out for' instincts and treat all players on an equal footing at the start of each game.

[NAG1]

If they actually knew what to be looking for in the first place as a dirty stroke then we wouldnt be having this conversation as neither place in question would finish any match they started.

[theskull1]

Don't understand that NAG1 

Heres the video btw (many thanks for the PM ****)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4hvwtn1oxU&feature=related

[NAG1]

I mean if the refs knew what was a seriously cowardly and dirty stroke and what was a genuine attempt to play the ball then both of the players in question would have to seriously take a look at their game if they wanted to play and not be continually suspended.

[theskull1]

The interesting thing about watching the video was that it took me 5 replays to see what ding did. Referees job is a nightmare