More Thuggery on the GAA field

[Croí na hÉireann]

Context is irrelevant.
It's like saying, "I hit him because he hit me".... doesn't matter, if you strike you go.
How many times have we heard the reason behind a suspension being that if there is evidence there then the powers that be will use it, and this explains away the use of video/photos etc.
For me, this is evidence the #11 struck. Nothing more or nothing less....context doesn't come into it.
Based on this evidence, he could well find himself in bother.
I've said before that IMO all the DT subs that came on the pitch should have been suspended...anyone who punched should also be suspended, but that applies to all sides.
5 year ban is unbelievable. If this is a precedent, there'll be more and more of these bans. Having done this once, they have to treat all future cases in the same way. What about the incident with Louth where the referee was, lets say harrassed, by a supporter after the final with Meath....should Louth not have had a 5 year ban?
I just dont get where that came from.....and if its going to be the norm from now on, fair enough. But unless it is going to be the norm for these sorts of issues then DT have been harshly treated to say the least.

I would imagine the 5 year ban was due to the subs and mentors getting involved in the melee. In the Louth case two of the supporters involved were in court this week, charged with assault. I'm not sure if its fair to punish teams based on incidents not involving the listed team members.

[Applesisapples]

The club prevented from playing in the all ireland club championship for the next 5 yrs. On top of everything else is this not a bit excessive?

But its probably no ban at all given they are now presumably promoted to intermediate having won the Tyrone Junior championship. I'm sure it happens that teams win Inter championships within a few years of a Junior championship, but it'd be rare enough.

stewartstown (2004 & 2006) and killyman (2005 & 2007) both won tyrone intermediate championships 2 years after winning junior. however it was easier to do it then compared to now, as half of the clubs in tyrone played in the senior championship at the time. the championship structures were then changed for the 2008 season.

intermediate in tyrone is very strong this year and when you have teams like cookstown, moy and galbally - imo i dont think derrytresk will be going for the ifc. in fact they'll probably be happy enough just to retain intermediate status which would be another fine achievement considering the quality of teams in the division.

a 5 year ban at provincial and national level would really only hurt the crossmaglens and the nemo rangers of this world.

Can they ask to be regraded in Tyrone? You can in Armagh I believe.

[ONeill]

That's an odd reading of it Hardy. Derrytresk have been mightily restrained in all of this.

Are you serious?

I will admit my perception may be skewed by reading this board as opposed to concentrating on what the club itself has been saying. Have a look at Ballymac's last post there, for example. Apart from yet another whinge about perceived bias and injustice, is his narrative about Declan O'Sullivan's alleged behaviour acceptable on the basis of "I had heard this story"? The kangaroo court of the gaaboard couldn't hold a candle to any perceived injustices meted out by the CCCC.

What have those posts got to do with Derrytresk GAC's response?

[tbrick18]

Context is irrelevant.
It's like saying, "I hit him because he hit me".... doesn't matter, if you strike you go.
How many times have we heard the reason behind a suspension being that if there is evidence there then the powers that be will use it, and this explains away the use of video/photos etc.
For me, this is evidence the #11 struck. Nothing more or nothing less....context doesn't come into it.
Based on this evidence, he could well find himself in bother.
I've said before that IMO all the DT subs that came on the pitch should have been suspended...anyone who punched should also be suspended, but that applies to all sides.
5 year ban is unbelievable. If this is a precedent, there'll be more and more of these bans. Having done this once, they have to treat all future cases in the same way. What about the incident with Louth where the referee was, lets say harrassed, by a supporter after the final with Meath....should Louth not have had a 5 year ban?
I just dont get where that came from.....and if its going to be the norm from now on, fair enough. But unless it is going to be the norm for these sorts of issues then DT have been harshly treated to say the least.

I would imagine the 5 year ban was due to the subs and mentors getting involved in the melee. In the Louth case two of the supporters involved were in court this week, charged with assault. I'm not sure if its fair to punish teams based on incidents not involving the listed team members.

I was only trying to make a point, I like you dont think Louth should have been punished for that. It was just an example that came to mind, you could equally as well use the row last weekend between Armagh and Cork or any number of incidents over the years.

[cornafean]

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2012/0209/1224311519762.html

Interesting picture and read...

That is a damning picture.

[screenexile]

Dear lord . . . this thing has gone from strength to strength with claim and counter claim and 'I heard this' and 'I heard that' Dromid are hard done by, The Hill are hard done by EVERYONE'S hard done by. Ban anyone who was caught throwing a punch, flicking a ballbag, kicking or jumping encroaching onto the playing area. It's not difficult!

My favourite post probably ever on the board . . .

I had heard this story, young Derrytresk player who admired O Sullivan went up to shake his hand and speak to him and was floored. I didnt believe it as I had heard O Sullivan was being jossled coming off the pitch and someone on the Derrytresk side was jeering at him and he pushed that player and was then surrounded and hit with a handbag and then ran to the tunnell. It is now clear why he was surrounded.

Jesus it's like something out of a Baseball movie where the wee kid goes to get his favourite players autograph and gets shunned only to go away and practice for years and come back to beat him in the last play of the World Series . . . that young buck will be marking O'Sulivan out of an AIF For Tyrone in the next few years and reminding him of what he done when Dromid played Derrytresk when he was just a lad! FFS!!!!

[AZOffaly]

Why was a Derrytresk sub near him in the first place?
Commiserating with him no doubt.
Anyway, still pictures can be very misleading.

How is this picture misleading?

Because it doesn't show context. Is this retalliation or did O'Sullivan just walk up and clatter this fella? I don't know either way, but that's why video is much better than stills. I certainly think this was the precursor to the handbag lady alright.

What hypocrisy, the row started because a Derrytresk player retaliated, you can't have your cake and eat it. Derrytresk were tried by the court of public opinion. The sadest part of all of this is an anti Northern bias both on here and in the southern media which is nothing short of shameful.

What are you talking about? At least read my posts before you take them out of context. And I have absolutely no anti Ulster bias, so you can pick that up off the floor too. What I said, if you bothered to read it, was that the picture tells us nothing except that #11 struck, which was wrong, absolutely. The 'row' started because a mentor and a Dromid player got involved with each other, and escalated when the subs cleared the first fence. I'm sure all of that (which we all saw on video for context) was debated in the hearings.

All I am saying here is that the picture shows a punch, and nothing else. Just like this one...

[heffo]

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2012/0209/1224311519762.html

Interesting picture and read...

Is that a coat, handbag or other blunt object in the hands of that woman loitering with intent?

[ziggysego]

That picture has been doctored. 7 is the wrong way round, as well as the sponsor on Tyrone's shirt. What else have those rascals in Armagh done to this?

[AZOffaly]

That picture has been doctored. 7 is the wrong way round, as well as the sponsor on Tyrone's shirt. What else have those rascals in Armagh done to this?

Just saw the editing above Jordan's number now. Apologies, I just picked the first photo of that incident I could find

[Croí na hÉireann]

Context is irrelevant.
It's like saying, "I hit him because he hit me".... doesn't matter, if you strike you go.
How many times have we heard the reason behind a suspension being that if there is evidence there then the powers that be will use it, and this explains away the use of video/photos etc.
For me, this is evidence the #11 struck. Nothing more or nothing less....context doesn't come into it.
Based on this evidence, he could well find himself in bother.
I've said before that IMO all the DT subs that came on the pitch should have been suspended...anyone who punched should also be suspended, but that applies to all sides.
5 year ban is unbelievable. If this is a precedent, there'll be more and more of these bans. Having done this once, they have to treat all future cases in the same way. What about the incident with Louth where the referee was, lets say harrassed, by a supporter after the final with Meath....should Louth not have had a 5 year ban?
I just dont get where that came from.....and if its going to be the norm from now on, fair enough. But unless it is going to be the norm for these sorts of issues then DT have been harshly treated to say the least.

I would imagine the 5 year ban was due to the subs and mentors getting involved in the melee. In the Louth case two of the supporters involved were in court this week, charged with assault. I'm not sure if its fair to punish teams based on incidents not involving the listed team members.

I was only trying to make a point, I like you dont think Louth should have been punished for that. It was just an example that came to mind, you could equally as well use the row last weekend between Armagh and Cork or any number of incidents over the years.

The incident where Kerrigan was sent off?

[TacadoirArdMhacha]

Editing of the jersey apart, I think the actual photograph is identical. I don't believe you can say with any certainty what happened in that infamous incident based on that photograph. Jordan may be in the midst of a punch on Marsden or he may be grabbing or pushing at the top part of Marsden's jersey. Marsden similarly may have just delivered a punch, or alternatively merely fended off the onrushing Jordan. Anyway, what I am certain of is that there was no cheating on Philip Jordan's part as he's recently made clear on twitter his disdain for cheating in other sports by people like Roberto Mancini so obviously he'd never stoop to those depths himself.

As for Derrytresk, I found the piece below interesting;

As for the fracas itself, Derrytresk officials claim their youngest player, 17-year-old Caolan Corr, was punched to the ground in front of the subs, who were sitting in the crowd because there was no proper seating for them in the stadium. They reacted on the spur of the moment to protect a young colleague; the club and its supporters admit this was wrong but insist the punishment is unjust.

A few questions arise from that particular piece of analysis. Was Caolan Corr in so much danger that he required the intervention of a group of over half a dozen? Unless there is another video somewhere, clearly not. Which of the Derrytresk starting players were suspended as a result of this fracas? If the punishment for the fracas is unjust, then that injustice must surely relate to the starting XV as noone could credibly argue that any of the supporters or subs who jumped the fence didn't deserve suspended. Would Derrytresk accept they are fortunate that their number 11 (presumably one of their better players) is fortunate to be playing in the final given his very clear role in a very cowardly act? If he has escaped further punishment because he received a yellow card for his part in the fracas then so be it, those are the rules but his behaviour clearly deserved greater sanction.

I think those attempting to turn this into an anti-Northern vendetta are very foolish to do so and make that allegation without any real basis.

[ONeill]

Five-year ban punishes the wrong Derrytresk players
By Martin Breheny


Thursday February 09 2012

JUSTICE extended beyond those found guilty of an offence is justice denied. The GAA disciplinary authorities found Derrytresk more culpable than Dromid Pearses for the ugly incidents which marred the AlB All-Ireland JFC semi-final in Portlaoise last month and acted accordingly, suspending more of their players and handing them a heavier fine.

Understandably, Derrytresk considered that unfair, but had to accept, pending an appeal, that the GAA's Central Competitions Control Committee (CCCC) and the Central Hearings Committee (CHC) reached their decision on the basis of the evidence before them.

Eight suspensions (later reduced to seven), plus a £5,000 fine (later halved to £2,500), was a severe punishment, but not anywhere as draconian, or as far-reaching, as the decision to ban Derrytresk from the Ulster and All-Ireland championships for the next five years.

What's more, it's utterly unfair. Apart altogether from punishing the players who didn't misbehave against Dromid, it sentences another generation to a tough sanction for offences in which they had no involvement.

Young Derrytresk men, who may not even have been in Portlaoise for the All-Ireland semi-final, let alone committed any offence, have been told that if they break into a team that wins a Tyrone title over the next five years, they will not be allowed to compete at Ulster or All-Ireland level.

That sanction is more persecution than justice and is most unlikely to be upheld, certainly if it comes before the Disputes Resolution Authority. Is it not utterly bizarre that the club is allowed to play in next Sunday's All-Ireland final, yet won't be permitted to compete in any future championship before 2018? Why punish players who are 15/16-years-old now when they are 20/21?

They should not have to pay for sins committed by others five years earlier.

Presumably, the decision to defer the ban on Derrytresk until next year was taken to ensure that the junior final would proceed next Sunday. Galway champions Clonbur would get no satisfaction whatsoever from being crowned champions on a walkover, while one suspects that replacing Derrytresk with Dromid Pearses wasn't really an option, since the Kerry club were in trouble with Croke Park too.

However, by allowing Derrytresk to proceed in a championship after committing offences which drew multiple suspensions and a hefty fine and barring them in advance from future championships, the GAA's disciplinary system has stretched logic to breaking point.

Would the same sanction apply if a county team committed the offences which drew such wrath on Derrytresk?

Of course not. In fact, the mere suggestion that a county team would be barred from the championship for five years would be dismissed as being utterly ludicrous.

All of which brings us back to justice. Why hit a small club so hard for the future, while, at the same time, allowing them to continue their pursuit of this year's All-Ireland title?

The offences were committed this year, not in 2013-2017, and should have been dealt with accordingly.

[Jinxy]

The Derrytresk sub in that O'Sullivan picture, I presume he wasn't one of the pitch invaders during the melee as he was too busy thinking about what he was going to say to his hero Declan after the match.
The Tyrone crowd here would want to wake up.
You all know O'Sullivan was singled out for verbal and physical abuse throughout that game.
If I was him and a Derrytresk sub ran towards me after the match, given all that had happened in the previous hour and a bit, I wouldn't be thinking "This lad obviously just wants to shake my hand."

[God14]

Considering the referee is approx 7 or 8 meters from the incident surely he would seen the incident & noted it in his report? O'Sullivan surely looking at a 6-8 week suspension here.

This whole saga stinks of double standards, and no doubt O'Sullivan will not even be summoned to explain his actions.