Tipperary vs. Galway All Ireland semi final 2015

[AZOffaly]

Milltown Row2 says it. It seems 'dirt' and 'malice' are part of the determination even though there's nothing about it in the rulebook. Are these things referees are told in their training classes? It would be useful to know.

Go to one of these training classes sure and you'll be sussed... Having played for many years and refereed the past 6/7 years I think I can make a judgement on intent/dirt/malice whether these word are in the rule book is irrelevant because if we applied the 'striking' rule as stated we'd have maybe 5/6 players red carded every game.. player kicks ball away and other player comes in slightly late and gets player on foot, red card?

now if you're just a keyboard/armchair warrior then you'd find it hard to work out the difference

Playing the man, not the ball

Red Card!!!!

[theskull1]

Ahh jaysus AZ ....no way is it a red card ... it wasn't as if he grabbed his helmet 

[Milltown Row2]

Milltown Row2 says it. It seems 'dirt' and 'malice' are part of the determination even though there's nothing about it in the rulebook. Are these things referees are told in their training classes? It would be useful to know.

Go to one of these training classes sure and you'll be sussed... Having played for many years and refereed the past 6/7 years I think I can make a judgement on intent/dirt/malice whether these word are in the rule book is irrelevant because if we applied the 'striking' rule as stated we'd have maybe 5/6 players red carded every game.. player kicks ball away and other player comes in slightly late and gets player on foot, red card?

now if you're just a keyboard/armchair warrior then you'd find it hard to work out the difference

Playing the man, not the ball

Red Card!!!!

Look I'm all for cleaning up the game issuing red cards as and when they are required, but if referees didn't use their own experiences and common sense then the game would loose its appeal, kids will walk away if half their summers will be sitting on the sidelines cause they struck a foot during the game!!

Ahh jaysus AZ ....no way is it a red card ... it wasn't as if he grabbed his helmet 

Hey I was waiting on that happening on Monday night ffs!! you'd have been all over me 

[deiseach]

Look I'm all for cleaning up the game issuing red cards as and when they are required, but if referees didn't use their own experiences and common sense then the game would loose its appeal, kids will walk away if half their summers will be sitting on the sidelines cause they struck a foot during the game!!

And now we have arguing from authority. Never mind.

[AZOffaly]

Deiseach, I know we've been discussing 1 particular incident, but what is your view about that striking rule? Do you think that every time someone strikes with a hurley, even in my scenario, they should be red carded?

If not, where do you draw the line?

I'm not being argumentative, I'm just trying to get a feel for why you think Joe Canning deserved a red card for what we all seem to think was accidental, or at worst a bit careless.

[deiseach]

I think it was extremely careless, to the point of being reckless. I don't buy the idea that every game has myriad examples of players being struck. There is plenty of contact all right, but the contact almost always falls well short of a strike. To me, the incident was akin to the red card that Sam Warburton received from Alain Rolland in the 2011 World Cup semi-final. It was not malicious and no harm was done, but players have a duty of care to their opponent, whether it be tackling a guy in the air or swinging a hurley around the body, and Warburton/Canning breached that duty of care. The only surefire way to ensure this kind of thing is nipped in the bud is supporting referees who make these hard decisions. For his troubles, Rolland got abused by all and sundry for 'ruining the game as a spectacle' and I have no doubt the same would have happened to Barry Kelly had he red-carded Canning. On a general level, I can accept that referees will be issued with guidelines regarding what constitutes a strike. Knowing what those guidelines are would be good for everyone. I would be less accepting of the idea that they would be told to rely on experience or 'common sense', something that is far from common in this world.

[AZOffaly]

Define a strike for me so. Because the rule just says 'strike'. It doesn't (as you say) differentiate between forms of striking. So when you say the contact falls well short of a strike, what do you mean?

As for the JC incident, lets park that for a moment because it may cloud the issue. You and I obviously have different opinions on whether it was careless or reckless. I go with the former, at worst, and you seem to be trending towards the latter. I can accept that if you believe it was reckless, then a red card would be a valid opinion on it. In fact our parameters for a red card would be similar, except I wouldn't call what he did 'reckless'. If it were reckless, I too would think a red card was understandable.

So I'm more interested in what you are defining as a strike. No more than yourself, I watch a lot of hurling. And every game I've seen or played in, some lad has been 'struck' by a hurley. Either on his hand when trying to catch the ball, or on the knuckles in the act of striking/blocking or whatever. Sure even when I look at my own knuckles I can see scars from where I've been 'struck'. What's the difference? I think the nub of what I'm interested in understanding is this statement "There is plenty of contact all right, but the contact almost always falls well short of a strike."

[finbar o tool]

theres a fine line sometimes between a strike and contact. thats where the ref MUST use experience/common sense to make a decision. as we all know, things are not always black and white on the field! i dont envy a referees job.

anyway, moving on!!!.....

[Milltown Row2]

I think it was extremely careless, to the point of being reckless. I don't buy the idea that every game has myriad examples of players being struck. There is plenty of contact all right, but the contact almost always falls well short of a strike. To me, the incident was akin to the red card that Sam Warburton received from Alain Rolland in the 2011 World Cup semi-final. It was not malicious and no harm was done, but players have a duty of care to their opponent, whether it be tackling a guy in the air or swinging a hurley around the body, and Warburton/Canning breached that duty of care. The only surefire way to ensure this kind of thing is nipped in the bud is supporting referees who make these hard decisions. For his troubles, Rolland got abused by all and sundry for 'ruining the game as a spectacle' and I have no doubt the same would have happened to Barry Kelly had he red-carded Canning. On a general level, I can accept that referees will be issued with guidelines regarding what constitutes a strike. Knowing what those guidelines are would be good for everyone. I would be less accepting of the idea that they would be told to rely on experience or 'common sense', something that is far from common in this world.

Grrrrrrrr. this is daft.. so referees shouldn't use common sense or experience then? feck!! look if you would like to know more about the rules/seminars/views or think tanks that go on with county boards and beyond then take up the whistle and try it... a lot of good men take time out to try and improve the standard of refereeing within all counties at all grades, yes we do have clampits that have a different view point on things but that goes for players abusing the rules and coaches who look to bend the rules when coaching kids ..

It's the job of the referee to enforce the rules as best he can, he won't always get it right but neither do the players. I hope that most referees enjoy the game, I know I do, refereed a div 3 game last night, while the quality wasn't great in parts, the fight and hunger to win the game was evident from the throw in, I enjoyed it and so did the players..

As for Sunday's game it will be remembered as being a cracking game and the best of the year, the JC incident didn't merit a red card

[deiseach]

I don't see why we should park the JC question, that's at the heart of the discussion. I consider it a 'strike' because he was going for the ball and made absolutely no consideration for those around him and ended up hitting another player. The fact that it wasn't a full-blown clatter doesn't matter. He was only trying to poke the ball to get control of it. I could just as easily - and I will - ask you why that wasn't a strike. Was it that he didn't meant to make contact? That there was insufficient force? That because it was around the head, and therefore that bit more lurid, we must make allowance for it?

[deiseach]

I'm reminded of the line that "experience is something you don't get until just after you need it" (Steven Wright, according to Google, which works for me). Everyone who has ever taken up a whistle had to referee a game for the first time. So while experience is grand in allowing you to quickly identify THAT scenario and reacting accordingly, I would still prefer to think that refereeing is applied from first principles.

[AZOffaly]

I don't see why we should park the JC question, that's at the heart of the discussion. I consider it a 'strike' because he was going for the ball and made absolutely no consideration for those around him and ended up hitting another player. The fact that it wasn't a full-blown clatter doesn't matter. He was only trying to poke the ball to get control of it. I could just as easily - and I will - ask you why that wasn't a strike. Was it that he didn't meant to make contact? That there was insufficient force? That because it was around the head, and therefore that bit more lurid, we must make allowance for it?

We park the JC question because we both see it as a strike. In your opinion it was reckless, thus a red card. In my opinion it was careless if anything and therefore yellow at most. So I understand where we differ there now.

However, you seem to be saying that EVERY strike is a red card, and I'm saying most 'strikes' in a normal game are not anything like red cards. You have said later on that there is 'contact' but not a lot of striking.

Therefore I'm curious as to what you define as a strike.

[deiseach]

I should emphasis in all of this that I don't think it was an outrageously bad decision or anything like that. I said previously that Barry Kelly chickened out or words to that effect. That was wrong. Some decisions are obvious, some are not so obvious. But you have only have four options - red, yellow, free or play on. I thought it was a red but I wouldn't expect Barry Kelly to lose any sleep over it.

[AZOffaly]

If I hit you on the knuckles as I try to hook you, is that a strike?

I should emphasis in all of this that I don't think it was an outrageously bad decision or anything like that. I said previously that Barry Kelly chickened out or words to that effect. That was wrong. Some decisions are obvious, some are not so obvious. But you have only have four options - red, yellow, free or play on. I thought it was a red but I wouldn't expect Barry Kelly to lose any sleep over it.

I don't think you are being very unreasonable or anything, I'm just curious at what you call a strike. If you have the same definition as me (ie. deliberately or recklessly hitting or attempting to hit an opponent) then we are on the same wavelength, and just disagree about the nature of JC's incident. i.e. Accidental/Careless/Reckless.

[finbar o tool]

I consider it a 'strike' because he was going for the ball and made absolutely no consideration for those around him and ended up hitting another player. The fact that it wasn't a full-blown clatter doesn't matter.

this is the problem right here....
we WANT/NEED players to go for the ball with full commitment/passion/determination. thats what makes hurling so special!!
we cant tell lads, "go for that ball and keep your eye on it, but be careful not collide/hit the lad your marking"!!
what is it we/I were told when we were younger - "go in hard for the ball, if you stand back you'll get a belt!"

or what about a lad getting the hand nearly taken off him catching a ball without protecting his hand?! its his own fault! you couldn't give a red card for that!