Harte threatens live TV ban !

[Goats Do Shave]

There are advantages of your county matches being shown on TV.
With these advantages, comes responsibility. Negate these responsibilities, then the consequences should be taken on the chin rather than claiming to be victimized!

[mackers]

But what your saying here is that two wrongs make a right? Would it not be better to punish all incidents that are missed and correct all wrongful dismissals? You seem to be saying that there's two problems with this system but instead of correcting them we'll just let them balance out. To me that makes zero sense.

This is a supposed to be a sport. If someone is disadvantaged by being subject to a rule that others aren't it stops being a sport.

Rubbish!! What rule are Tyrone being subjected to that the rest of us aren't? If you're on TV and you break the rules then you've a bigger chance of being caught.........that's the difference, and you'd think that since they come to prominence in 2003 that the Tyrone players would have caught on to that and stop the repeated offences.

[supersarsfields]

But what your saying here is that two wrongs make a right? Would it not be better to punish all incidents that are missed and correct all wrongful dismissals? You seem to be saying that there's two problems with this system but instead of correcting them we'll just let them balance out. To me that makes zero sense.

This is a supposed to be a sport. If someone is disadvantaged by being subject to a rule that others aren't it stops being a sport.

Rubbish!! What rule are Tyrone being subjected to that the rest of us aren't? If you're on TV and you break the rules then you've a bigger chance of being caught.........that's the difference, and you'd think that since they come to prominence in 2003 that the Tyrone players would have caught on to that and stop the repeated offences.

If you don't honestly think that Tyrone have had their indiscipline punished more than others then we're never going to agree on this. There has been numerous incidents mentioned already in this thread that have highlighted this. I would like to hear explanations as to why certain incidents have been subjected to retrospective bans while others also clearly televised have gone without action. A ref has an excuse if he misses something. TV does not.
No point going on about repeat offences. The problem is that it seems to be Tyrone's repeat offences are being punished other teams aren't. And if you don't accept this then we're not going to agree and we'll just end up going round in circles.

There are advantages of your county matches being shown on TV.
With these advantages, comes responsibility. Negate these responsibilities, then the consequences should be taken on the chin rather than claiming to be victimized!

What advantages?

[blewuporstuffed]

But what your saying here is that two wrongs make a right? Would it not be better to punish all incidents that are missed and correct all wrongful dismissals? You seem to be saying that there's two problems with this system but instead of correcting them we'll just let them balance out. To me that makes zero sense.

This is a supposed to be a sport. If someone is disadvantaged by being subject to a rule that others aren't it stops being a sport.

Rubbish!! What rule are Tyrone being subjected to that the rest of us aren't? If you're on TV and you break the rules then you've a bigger chance of being caught.........that's the difference, and you'd think that since they come to prominence in 2003 that the Tyrone players would have caught on to that and stop the repeated offences.

If you don't honestly think that Tyrone have had their indiscipline punished more than others then we're never going to agree on this. There has been numerous incidents mentioned already in this thread that have highlighted this. I would like to hear explanations as to why certain incidents have been subjected to retrospective bans while others also clearly televised have gone without action. A ref has an excuse if he misses something. TV does not.
No point going on about repeat offences. The problem is that it seems to be Tyrone's repeat offences are being punished other teams aren't. And if you don't accept this then we're not going to agree and we'll just end up going round in circles.

There are advantages of your county matches being shown on TV.
With these advantages, comes responsibility. Negate these responsibilities, then the consequences should be taken on the chin rather than claiming to be victimized!

What advantages?

this is the main point here, that most seem to be missing

[mylestheslasher]

mylestheslasher, for the county that produced the individual who wrote the best ever poem about yourself (William Collins, who was actually from Strabane ), you'd think that you'd cut us a wee bit of slack from time to time 

Its nothing against Tyrone at all. I would expect the same rules to be applied against any county and indeed it is wrong that certain players from other teams have gotten away with stuff even when on TV - but that is a different matter.

[Fear ón Srath Bán]

I would expect the same rules to be applied against any county and indeed it is wrong that certain players from other teams have gotten away with stuff even when on TV - but that is a different matter.

On the contrary, that's the heart (Harte?) of the matter. If there are sporting laws that are demonstrably unfair then they won't have respect, and if they don't have respect they're worse than useless.

No one is saying that punishment should not be meted out when it's merited, what's being said is it should be applied in all cases where possible or none, i.e., all televised games should be subject to the same degree of scrutiny.

[mylestheslasher]

I would expect the same rules to be applied against any county and indeed it is wrong that certain players from other teams have gotten away with stuff even when on TV - but that is a different matter.

On the contrary, that's the heart (Harte?) of the matter. If there are sporting laws that are demonstrably unfair then they won't have respect, and if they don't have respect they're worse than useless.

No one is saying that punishment should not be meted out when it's merited, what's being said is it should be applied in all cases where possible or none, i.e., all televised games should be subject to the same degree of scrutiny.

I argue there are two issues.

Issue 1 - should video evidence be used to convict or clear a player after a game given that this will only be possible in games that have TV cameras at them. I say Yes to this.

Issue 2 - Should all games that have cameras at them be subject to the same consistent examination no matter what the team. I say Yes to this too but I grant you this has not always happened and it is reasonable to be suspicious when clear examples are let go.

But my reading of what Mickey Harte was on about was issue 1 above, not issue 2.

[Sandy Hill]

Excellent article by Sean Moran on this issue in today's Irish Times.

[red hander]

GAA should have a citing system similar to rugby

IT WAS the incident that in the eyes of most people marked the beginning of the end for Ireland last Saturday. Prop Cian Healy committed a professional foul on French scrum half Morgan Parra. English referee Wayne Barnes saw it clearly enough to walk up and flash a yellow card immediately. Healy walked straight to the sin bin leaving his team-mates to reap the whirlwind.

What slim chance they had of avoiding that fate ended when Jerry Flannery launched a spectacular foul on an opponent and a promising penalty was reversed.

A friend primarily interested in Gaelic games texted me to note how clockwork the whole process was: foul, punishment and acceptance. It's not always like that even in rugby – and the game has had recent issues with consistency of suspension policy – but, by and large, authority is accepted and responsibility taken for indiscipline.

From a disciplinary perspective, the more important aspect of rugby is that crime doesn't pay. Indiscipline will cost your team. Sides cling on grimly during the period when a player is sin binned but in general they concede scores. Players get cited for misbehaviour and pick up suspensions.

It didn't take long for such musings to acquire further topical edge. Tyrone lined out the following day against Mayo and their fate, a one-point defeat, was contributed to by the absence of three players, Martin Penrose, Justin McMahon and Conor Gormley, all of whom had been suspended after referee Pat McEnaney had revised his original opinion of their foul play after viewing video evidence of the Tyrone-Derry NFL match.

On Saturday night Eoin Bradley had suffered a similar fate as a result of the same process and wasn't able to play when his county lost to Dublin.

The grumbling wasn't long building into a tumult of indignation and the old chestnut of 'trial by media' has been much displayed in the public arena in the past couple of days. It's not fair, the argument runs, that players in televised matches aren't allowed to foul without consequences once they can do so behind the referee's back.

It has been no surprise that Tyrone manager Mickey Harte has been to the forefront of this. His problems with television evidence have been well-aired.

Extraordinarily, neither Harte nor Derry manager Damian Cassidy have made any bones about the facts of the matter. All four players initially opted for hearings after the suspensions were proposed but, despite the apparatus of the Central Hearings Committee having been assembled in time to expedite the process, the requests were all dropped on the Saturday and the bans accepted.

Is it reasonable to argue that teams on camera are being discriminated against in comparison to players in matches with less box-office appeal? Only to the extent that robbers arrested because a shop has CCTV might launch a defence on the grounds that other premises without such protection were robbed with impunity. Or that it's unfair on drunken drivers that someone equally inebriated drove home on a different road without hindrance because there was no police check in that direction.

And if someone fond of driving home over the limit lived at the end of a road where there were frequent checks wouldn't they modify their behaviour rather than complain that the police presence was unfair?

These comparisons aren't intended to draw equivalence between violent crimes or drink driving and indiscipline in Gaelic games but simply to address the argument that failure to punish every wrongdoing shouldn't mean that all miscreants escape without sanction.

Whenever human arbitration is involved there will be mistakes. Even without error there will be incidents that a referee can't be expected to see. Should the failure for whatever reason by a referee to punish adequately a red-card offence in a Division Four match invalidate correct imposition of the rules in a Division One fixture that happens to be on television?

The crisis of indiscipline clearly demands that all instances be dealt with and, if some of that corrective action follows on from video evidence, it's hard to see the problem.

Perhaps Harte's point of view is partly based on his not believing indiscipline to be that big a problem. A year ago during the experimental disciplinary rules trial, the Tyrone manager spoke out against the rationale behind the proposals.

"You'd think that the GAA, and football in particular, was in total crisis, a discipline crisis," he said. "There is so much talk about the rules, and indiscipline, almost as if it's anarchy out there. It's not true. There are certain incidents that have to be dealt with and always will be, but 95 per cent of what we're doing is positive, is great to see."

Yet the association at large appears to have a different view. Last year's congress might not have passed the experimental rules but the mood of concern about cynical play and indiscipline was such that the proposals were overwhelmingly approved, 177-100 or 63.8 per cent, just short of the two-thirds majority required for adoption.

Does this mean that all is well within the GAA's disciplinary structures? No it doesn't. Referees still struggle to attain a level of consistency on the field and frequently bottle hard decisions.

An unfair pressure on them is the subject of a motion for this year's congress. Recently retired intercounty referee John Bannon's club, Legan Sarsfields, has proposed a motion bringing to an end the system of referees reviewing video evidence and recategorising offences.

Bannon was involved at the sharp end of this when in his last match he failed to red card Cork's John Miskella during last August's All-Ireland semi-final. Disappointingly, for a referee who had always dealt firmly with foul play, he then declined to review that decision but his club's argument for congress is a sensible one and perhaps sheds some light on his decision of six months ago.

It simply argues that it isn't the place of a referee to review his decision – not that video evidence is wrong or that referees shouldn't be overruled. The procedure has always been ridiculous and was cooked up on the spurious grounds that referees shouldn't be overruled by committee.

Instead they have simply been forced to overrule themselves and there have been complaints that if they don't do so, their match allocation suffers. It's hard to see what the problem is with such a consequence. If referees wilfully refuse to do their job they shouldn't be asked to take important matches.

But the fact remains that, like rugby, the GAA should have a citing system and in the Central Competitions Control Committee they have the ideal body to fulfil that role. Instead of asking the referee to finger a miscreant on foot of video evidence, the CCCC should simply do it themselves, propose a suspension and prosecute the case if the player in question requests a hearing.

Such a reform wouldn't prevent the squealing over video evidence but it would put the process on a more solid foundation?

smoran@irishtimes.com

[Fear ón Srath Bán]

I argue there are two issues.

Issue 1 - should video evidence be used to convict or clear a player after a game given that this will only be possible in games that have TV cameras at them. I say Yes to this.

Issue 2 - Should all games that have cameras at them be subject to the same consistent examination no matter what the team. I say Yes to this too but I grant you this has not always happened and it is reasonable to be suspicious when clear examples are let go.

But my reading of what Mickey Harte was on about was issue 1 above, not issue 2.

But that (your reading) is quite incorrect (go back and look at what he said): MH was not bemoaning the fact that there were cameras and subsequent scrutiny, he was bemoaning the fact that not all games that have cameras at them are scrutinised to the same degree. It's that simple, all he is asking for is parity of treatment, which is more relevant to your number 2.

Regarding 1 above, where do you actually draw the in line in retroactive judgements and punishments? Perhaps the GAA should lead the sporting way (for once) and introduce technology to keep the decisions taken relating to the games within the boundaries of playing time and playing time only. These current controversies and difficulties arise because of the GAA's reluctance to bow to the technological inevitable, technology that is already widely available.

[mackers]

But what your saying here is that two wrongs make a right? Would it not be better to punish all incidents that are missed and correct all wrongful dismissals? You seem to be saying that there's two problems with this system but instead of correcting them we'll just let them balance out. To me that makes zero sense.

This is a supposed to be a sport. If someone is disadvantaged by being subject to a rule that others aren't it stops being a sport.

Rubbish!! What rule are Tyrone being subjected to that the rest of us aren't? If you're on TV and you break the rules then you've a bigger chance of being caught.........that's the difference, and you'd think that since they come to prominence in 2003 that the Tyrone players would have caught on to that and stop the repeated offences.

If you don't honestly think that Tyrone have had their indiscipline punished more than others then we're never going to agree on this. There has been numerous incidents mentioned already in this thread that have highlighted this. I would like to hear explanations as to why certain incidents have been subjected to retrospective bans while others also clearly televised have gone without action. A ref has an excuse if he misses something. TV does not.
No point going on about repeat offences. The problem is that it seems to be Tyrone's repeat offences are being punished other teams aren't. And if you don't accept this then we're not going to agree and we'll just end up going round in circles.

There are advantages of your county matches being shown on TV.
With these advantages, comes responsibility. Negate these responsibilities, then the consequences should be taken on the chin rather than claiming to be victimized!

What advantages?

On two separate posts on this thread I've made it quite clear that I can see where Tyrone posters feel hard done by. My point is that maybe the Tyrone players and management need to tackle the CAUSE of these bans instead of complaining about the SYMPTOMS. Tyrone have a discipline problem that should be addressed. Can you see that? Do you agree with it?

[lawnseed]

totally agree mackers. tyrones abrasive in your face style has paid dividends but doesnt sit well with the cumley maidens dancing at the crossroads mindset that besets croke park. hartes gallant efforts to cover up his teams short comings by hinting at the ridiculous notion that cameras would turn up to healy pk and be turned away is laughable. the tv rights to the national league have already been sold all that would happen is that croke pk would move the game to a different venue and if tyrone didnt show they'd lose the points. harte should sit the team down instead of training and watch their games with a ref and point out where their going wrong. referees are not great people to get on the wrong side of they are human and no matter how good they are if they expect you to give trouble the slightest thing is gonna set them off and you WILL lose matches 

[down6061689194]

Just had a thought, how do RTE and TG manage to show highlights of most games?

Maybe they do retrospective filming?

[AZOffaly]

Just had a thought, how do RTE and TG manage to show highlights of most games?

Maybe they do retrospective filming?

Live games usually have at least 3-4 cameras. Hence all the different angles and opportunities to see things.

Non-Live or highlight games usually have only 1 camera, usually in the middle of the stand or terrace. That follows the ball all the time.

When you have all the other cameras shooting from different angles, they are capturing whatever they are pointing at, but the viewer only sees that when the director cuts to that camera or plays a replay from the camera.

So, live game, more cameras more evidence.

[crossfire]

The CCCC are a shower of C's.