Ulster club senior football championship - 2015

[Orior]

Not going through every post on this thread here but are there seriously some people here saying that they think a team should be allowed to start extra time with 15 if they have lost men through red cards during the course of the game?

Is there some people? Yes
Are they serious? Yes
Do they think? Yes
Are they sanctimonious hooers? Possibly
Start extra time with 15 players? Yes, and that includes the authors of the GAA rulebook

[nrico2006]

Not going through every post on this thread here but are there seriously some people here saying that they think a team should be allowed to start extra time with 15 if they have lost men through red cards during the course of the game?

Is there some people? Yes
Are they serious? Yes
Do they think? Yes
Are they sanctimonious hooers? Possibly
Start extra time with 15 players? Yes, and that includes the authors of the GAA rulebook

It goes against the logic of every sport that the majority of us on this island have played or been exposed to all our lives though.  If you are playing a match and a player is sent-off, there is no expectation that your numbers will/should be replenished if you finish the game level and extra-time is to come.  How long has this rule been in existence?  Also, with the number of discrepancies in the GAA rulebook I don't think classing the authors of the rulebook as some high and might power is very credible.

[Applesisapples]

because it is a new game, scoreboards reset to zero, new tickets, on a different date, another championship appearance against a mans name  etc etc. Extra time is not a new game (regardless of what the stupid rules says), its an extension of the same game. If you go down to 14 men, 13 men, whatever, it should carry into extra time as its the same game (except in GAA land when its not the same game, but a new game). The rule couldn't be any more Irish.

The scoreboard isn't set to zero in extra time, but as it was a draw it is much the same.  The rest of the guff abut extra tickets and so forth is irrelevant to the issue. The red carded offender cannot return, so all that happens is that a red card becomes a black card.

the rest of the 'guff' you sanctimonious hooer is to show how ridiculous the calling of extra time a 'new game' is. imo, allowing teams to start extra time with 15 is rewarding teams breaking rules. Its as simple as that. You get a man / men sent off during the 60 / 70 mins, the game goes into extra time, take your oil and have a word with the offenders in your team

I'm with sanctimonious hooer on this. If a team finished with 14 men then would you propose that they start a replay with 14 men?

no, 15. It's a replay, a new game, not extra time @ the end of a game

That's the point, if a drawn Ulster Final is not going to a replay then in fairness both teams can reset for extra time. Whilst obsessing on the fact that Cross restarted with 15 we over look the fact that they wisely used 26 players over the 80 minutes. Bottom line is that Extra time is considered a new game in place of an actual replay and everybody signs up to the rules.

[blewuporstuffed]

because it is a new game, scoreboards reset to zero, new tickets, on a different date, another championship appearance against a mans name  etc etc. Extra time is not a new game (regardless of what the stupid rules says), its an extension of the same game. If you go down to 14 men, 13 men, whatever, it should carry into extra time as its the same game (except in GAA land when its not the same game, but a new game). The rule couldn't be any more Irish.

The scoreboard isn't set to zero in extra time, but as it was a draw it is much the same.  The rest of the guff abut extra tickets and so forth is irrelevant to the issue. The red carded offender cannot return, so all that happens is that a red card becomes a black card.

the rest of the 'guff' you sanctimonious hooer is to show how ridiculous the calling of extra time a 'new game' is. imo, allowing teams to start extra time with 15 is rewarding teams breaking rules. Its as simple as that. You get a man / men sent off during the 60 / 70 mins, the game goes into extra time, take your oil and have a word with the offenders in your team

I'm with sanctimonious hooer on this. If a team finished with 14 men then would you propose that they start a replay with 14 men?

IMO there shouldn't be replays. ALL games ending in a draw that require a winner should go to extra time.

[westbound]

because it is a new game, scoreboards reset to zero, new tickets, on a different date, another championship appearance against a mans name  etc etc. Extra time is not a new game (regardless of what the stupid rules says), its an extension of the same game. If you go down to 14 men, 13 men, whatever, it should carry into extra time as its the same game (except in GAA land when its not the same game, but a new game). The rule couldn't be any more Irish.

The scoreboard isn't set to zero in extra time, but as it was a draw it is much the same.  The rest of the guff abut extra tickets and so forth is irrelevant to the issue. The red carded offender cannot return, so all that happens is that a red card becomes a black card.

the rest of the 'guff' you sanctimonious hooer is to show how ridiculous the calling of extra time a 'new game' is. imo, allowing teams to start extra time with 15 is rewarding teams breaking rules. Its as simple as that. You get a man / men sent off during the 60 / 70 mins, the game goes into extra time, take your oil and have a word with the offenders in your team

I'm with sanctimonious hooer on this. If a team finished with 14 men then would you propose that they start a replay with 14 men?

no, 15. It's a replay, a new game, not extra time @ the end of a game

That's the point, if a drawn Ulster Final is not going to a replay then in fairness both teams can reset for extra time. Whilst obsessing on the fact that Cross restarted with 15 we over look the fact that they wisely used 26 players over the 80 minutes. Bottom line is that Extra time is considered a new game in place of an actual replay and everybody signs up to the rules.

+1

[JoG2]

because it is a new game, scoreboards reset to zero, new tickets, on a different date, another championship appearance against a mans name  etc etc. Extra time is not a new game (regardless of what the stupid rules says), its an extension of the same game. If you go down to 14 men, 13 men, whatever, it should carry into extra time as its the same game (except in GAA land when its not the same game, but a new game). The rule couldn't be any more Irish.

The scoreboard isn't set to zero in extra time, but as it was a draw it is much the same.  The rest of the guff abut extra tickets and so forth is irrelevant to the issue. The red carded offender cannot return, so all that happens is that a red card becomes a black card.

the rest of the 'guff' you sanctimonious hooer is to show how ridiculous the calling of extra time a 'new game' is. imo, allowing teams to start extra time with 15 is rewarding teams breaking rules. Its as simple as that. You get a man / men sent off during the 60 / 70 mins, the game goes into extra time, take your oil and have a word with the offenders in your team

I'm with sanctimonious hooer on this. If a team finished with 14 men then would you propose that they start a replay with 14 men?

no, 15. It's a replay, a new game, not extra time @ the end of a game

That's the point, if a drawn Ulster Final is not going to a replay then in fairness both teams can reset for extra time. Whilst obsessing on the fact that Cross restarted with 15 we over look the fact that they wisely used 26 players over the 80 minutes. Bottom line is that Extra time is considered a new game in place of an actual replay and everybody signs up to the rules.

my point is, the bit in bold means the 2 x finalists will not be lining out to start a new game ie will play 20 mins extra of the existing game. imo, you should continue extra time (ie a continuation of the same game) with the same amount of players you finished the same game with. Surely this is common sense?

game game game game game

This is no shape or form a go at Cross, I've nothing but admiration for the club.  Orior, this isn't  anti-Cross / Armagh , I'm married to an Armagh woman (maybe it is then!). I'm merely questioning the existing rule

[Applesisapples]

because it is a new game, scoreboards reset to zero, new tickets, on a different date, another championship appearance against a mans name  etc etc. Extra time is not a new game (regardless of what the stupid rules says), its an extension of the same game. If you go down to 14 men, 13 men, whatever, it should carry into extra time as its the same game (except in GAA land when its not the same game, but a new game). The rule couldn't be any more Irish.

The scoreboard isn't set to zero in extra time, but as it was a draw it is much the same.  The rest of the guff abut extra tickets and so forth is irrelevant to the issue. The red carded offender cannot return, so all that happens is that a red card becomes a black card.

the rest of the 'guff' you sanctimonious hooer is to show how ridiculous the calling of extra time a 'new game' is. imo, allowing teams to start extra time with 15 is rewarding teams breaking rules. Its as simple as that. You get a man / men sent off during the 60 / 70 mins, the game goes into extra time, take your oil and have a word with the offenders in your team

I'm with sanctimonious hooer on this. If a team finished with 14 men then would you propose that they start a replay with 14 men?

no, 15. It's a replay, a new game, not extra time @ the end of a game

That's the point, if a drawn Ulster Final is not going to a replay then in fairness both teams can reset for extra time. Whilst obsessing on the fact that Cross restarted with 15 we over look the fact that they wisely used 26 players over the 80 minutes. Bottom line is that Extra time is considered a new game in place of an actual replay and everybody signs up to the rules.

my point is, the bit in bold means the 2 x finalists will not be lining out to start a new game ie will play 20 mins extra of the existing game. imo, you should continue extra time (ie a continuation of the same game) with the same amount of players you finished the same game with. Surely this is common sense?

game game game game game

This is no shape or form a go at Cross, I've nothing but admiration for the club.  Orior, this isn't  anti-Cross / Armagh , I'm married to an Armagh woman (maybe it is then!). I'm merely questioning the existing rule

So it comes down to a matter of opinion on fairness and there is a split.

[blewuporstuffed]

I struggle to understand the 'new game' argument TBH.
I am surprised there are so many people take this view.

[lenny]

I struggle to understand the 'new game' argument TBH.
I am surprised there are so many people take this view.

It's completely ridiculous and ludicrous. A player could be sent off after 59 minutes and his team plays for one minute with 14 men. The other team gets a player sent off one minute into extra time for the same offence and his team has to play for 19 minutes with 14 men. The 2 players are sent off 2 minutes apart or less, for the same offence and yet one team gets much more of a disadvantage than the other. Something similar to that happened in Sunday's final. Cross had a player sent off very near the end and had a very short time with 14. Hughes gets sent off a few minutes later albeit in extra time and his team gets much longer with 14 players. The whole new game thing has to be looked at again.

[brokencrossbar1]

I struggle to understand the 'new game' argument TBH.
I am surprised there are so many people take this view.

It's completely ridiculous and ludicrous. A player could be sent off after 59 minutes and his team plays for one minute with 14 men. The other team gets a player sent off one minute into extra time for the same offence and his team has to play for 19 minutes with 14 men. The 2 players are sent off 2 minutes apart or less, for the same offence and yet one team gets much more of a disadvantage than the other. Something similar to that happened in Sunday's final. Cross had a player sent off very near the end and had a very short time with 14. Hughes gets sent off a few minutes later albeit in extra time and his team gets much longer with 14 players. The whole new game thing has to be looked at again.

I'll tell you what you all do,  go to your county reps in your clubs and ask them to raise this point for debate and amendment.  It is what it is and sometimes you benefit and sometimes you don't. 

[AZOffaly]

I'm confused as to why this is getting such an airing. The biggest problem I had was that red and yellow cards were treated differently in extra time (you could replace the red card, but yellow cards accrued counted into extra time). The fact that that is no longer the case makes me happy enough.

[armaghniac]

I'm confused as to why this is getting such an airing. The biggest problem I had was that red and yellow cards were treated differently in extra time (you could replace the red card, but yellow cards accrued counted into extra time). The fact that that is no longer the case makes me happy enough.

AZ on the nail, as usual.

[Applesisapples]

I struggle to understand the 'new game' argument TBH.
I am surprised there are so many people take this view.

It's completely ridiculous and ludicrous. A player could be sent off after 59 minutes and his team plays for one minute with 14 men. The other team gets a player sent off one minute into extra time for the same offence and his team has to play for 19 minutes with 14 men. The 2 players are sent off 2 minutes apart or less, for the same offence and yet one team gets much more of a disadvantage than the other. Something similar to that happened in Sunday's final. Cross had a player sent off very near the end and had a very short time with 14. Hughes gets sent off a few minutes later albeit in extra time and his team gets much longer with 14 players. The whole new game thing has to be looked at again.

I'll tell you what you all do,  go to your county reps in your clubs and ask them to raise this point for debate and amendment.  It is what it is and sometimes you benefit and sometimes you don't.

100% everyone knows the rules when they start no use in bitching afterwards.

[Applesisapples]

I'm confused as to why this is getting such an airing. The biggest problem I had was that red and yellow cards were treated differently in extra time (you could replace the red card, but yellow cards accrued counted into extra time). The fact that that is no longer the case makes me happy enough.

No they didn't rule changed in April

[Clov]

I don't understand what the problem is either. The 20min extra period is either an extension/continuation of the drawn game or it acts as a substitute for a reply. If its the former then all cards carry over, if it is the latter then they don't.

I take it that the ideal is a replay but practical considerations mean we have to make do with extra periods immediately after the drawn game.