Offaly to lose point won in Longford??

Bord na Mona man · March 09, 2007, 03:53:09 PM

I'm not sure how bad Casey's offence was and I condemn abusing refs, but there are some refs who can overreact to any questioning of their authority.
Most obvious examples of this are referees who make a really bad decision and then move the ball forward at the hint of any frustration. Most of us in the same situation would probably guess if we've made a bad call and not seek to further enrage people by adding on more punishment.

You can often tell by a ref's body language that they are bulling to lay down the law and show who is boss. The ref who races towards the player waving a card on his way, as opposed to the one who calmly restores order and looks in control.

I'm not projecting what happened in this instance, but it is quite possible that Casey said something that some refs might have ignored, but this ref took exception to. By all accounts he was having a bad day. There is no way a committee are not going to back the ref, unless he has done something ridiculous. So the fact that they enforced a 4 suspension, doesn't necessarily mean there was a grave offence committed.

Lone Shark · March 09, 2007, 04:09:52 PM

It's a fair point. I don't know much about this ref and I wasn't at the game, so I wouldn't like to speculate on that side of it.

To go back to the original issue, up to now I had no problem with their challenging it, but then I read this little clip on Unison:

No decision was reached on the thorny issue of points difference and it is expected that this will now be referred to the Central Council.

Longford argued that Offaly's scores from the game should be removed from the points deferential.

Is that right? Longford are arguing that if Casey didn't play they would have won the game 3-8 to 0-0?

Please tell me I'm misinterpreting that......

Billys Boots · March 09, 2007, 04:30:13 PM

Oh aye lads, we'd have won by that alright.

INDIANA · March 09, 2007, 04:32:50 PM

i'd say longford must be proud of themselves getting an 18 yr old a 6 month ban.

AZOffaly · March 09, 2007, 04:37:20 PM

Not Longford's problem Indiana. It was Offaly, and Ken himself of course, that ended him up in this pickle. Longford are blameless in this, although the quote highlighted by LS seems a little bit OTT.

Billys Boots · March 09, 2007, 04:45:36 PM

Yeah Indiana, the whole of Longford were responsible for his bad behaviour. We're ashamed of ourselves.

Shamrock Shore · March 09, 2007, 04:49:56 PM

Longford had to object for two reasons:

1. If they didn't Offaly would still haved been deducted a point but, by not objecting, Longford would not have been awarded it.
2. Longford did not want to set a precedent.

I think 6 month's is an awful harsh sentence and hopefully, on appeal, it will be reduced.

I think the 'give Offaly 0-00' is someone being mischevious and I don't think it's official policy from the good citizens sittting on Longford County Board.

LaurelEye · March 09, 2007, 04:53:52 PM

Quote from: Shamrock ShoreI think the 'give Offaly 0-00' is someone being mischevious and I don't think it's official policy from the good citizens sittting on Longford County Board.

Diplomatic skills strike again?

Docking the point is more than enough punishment for the offence concerned. Putting an extra 17-point-difference burden on Offaly would be crucifying them.

Lone Shark · March 09, 2007, 04:56:06 PM

indiana, Longford were dead right to object. Pat Roe's outburst now visible on Hogan Stand is embarrassing to say the least, and the temptation to blame it on him being from Laois is strong.....

Seriously though, was it not an odd environment for a Longford county board official to be "mischievious"??

I would have thought that in the interests of being reasonable, they would have accepted the points, been glad Offaly aren't contesting the decision and accepted justice was done. (We wouldn't have been right to, but could you honestly say that would have happened with every county?)