Author Topic: Row in Mayo LGFA  (Read 35218 times)

Jinxy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12333
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #60 on: August 23, 2018, 01:23:58 PM »
The 288 rule is fine but is not applicable in this case.

How on earth do you figure that?

A third of the panel walking off for false reasons (which would reflect poorly on the county setup) in the week leading up to a big game is not bringing the game into disrepute?

Didn't think they gave any reason, false or otherwise.
If you were any use you'd be playing.

hardstation

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25282
  • On a cold and misty morning on the Anagaire bridge
    • View Profile
    • gaaboard.com
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #61 on: August 23, 2018, 01:32:29 PM »
The 288 rule is fine but is not applicable in this case.

How on earth do you figure that?

A third of the panel walking off for false reasons (which would reflect poorly on the county setup) in the week leading up to a big game is not bringing the game into disrepute?
Leaving a panel is not bringing the game into disrepute.


AZOffaly

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25138
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #62 on: August 23, 2018, 01:42:38 PM »
I thought the punishment was against Carnacon because the charge was that Carnacon the club coerced all its members to leave the panel (for whatever reason). That's why the charge is about bringing the game into disrepute.

Rule 193 is a joke, but I don't think that's what the club is banned for.

The player themselves, as individuals, are not banned, is that correct?

shark

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1086
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #63 on: August 23, 2018, 01:43:14 PM »
Whatever about their reasons for leaving the county set up, they are amateur players and are under absolutely no obligation to play for the county team.

Throwing their club out of the championship is up there with one of the most ridiculous decisions Iíve ever heard and will surely be overturned. It strikes me that people were sick of them winning and decided that this was an opportunity to fcuk them out. Thatís pretty pathetic.
Apparently they are obliged to play county if chosen. Was mentioned on Off the Ball earlier by Mayo journalist Edwin McGreal.
Not sure how he works that one out tbh.

Go to 13:30

Carnacon thrown out of Mayo championship - GAA on Off The Ball - Off The Ball - http://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/Off_The_Ball/GAA_on_Off_The_Ball/231883/Carnacon_thrown_out_of_Mayo_championship

Rule 193 ladies football. County boards have power to suspend for 6 months a player who refuses to travel or play for their county.

Surely that rule can be challenged.  Especially given the fact that the punishment doesn't seem to correlate with the rule, i.e. they haven't seemingly suspended any players but have kicked a team out.  Plus, there were non-Carnacon players who refused to play and they or their club haven't been punished.  Seems very unethical.
Rule 193 is not the rule that kicks Carnacon to touch, the rule the Mayo ladies football board used was rule 288 as quoted previously by From the Bunker which is  bringing the game into disrepute.

I know that but surely the 'member' in 288 is individual specific at not aimed at a club?  Additionally, if it can be applied to a club then why are the clubs of the others who left the panel not being subjected to the same punishment?
You quoted my post on rule 193. Think this will run and run.

I doubt it will run too far. I expect the Connacht Council to overturn it once appeal is heard. The idea that you can compel club players to play county is legally bankrupt. The Carnacon players who left the county panel could have been 100% in the wrong and this decision would still be nonsense.

The connacht council that is headed by john prenty have no jurisdiction over this matter

Do you really think that is what I was referring to? Really?

There is an LGFA equivalent.

hardstation

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25282
  • On a cold and misty morning on the Anagaire bridge
    • View Profile
    • gaaboard.com
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #64 on: August 23, 2018, 01:51:08 PM »
I thought the punishment was against Carnacon because the charge was that Carnacon the club coerced all its members to leave the panel (for whatever reason). That's why the charge is about bringing the game into disrepute.

Rule 193 is a joke, but I don't think that's what the club is banned for.

The player themselves, as individuals, are not banned, is that correct?
Iím not sure they have evidence of that. Also, Rule 288 states Ďmemberí. How can they ban the entire club from the competition?


easytiger95

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1247
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #65 on: August 23, 2018, 01:53:26 PM »
I was listening to this on Off the Ball last night, and I thought yer man Joe was ridiculous. He completely prejudged the County Board position. Why would anyone from the board be interested in giving their views when he has already declared that he thinks they are eejits? Not the first time he has done this. Good presenter- but a very, very poor journalist.

AZOffaly

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25138
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #66 on: August 23, 2018, 01:54:14 PM »
I thought the punishment was against Carnacon because the charge was that Carnacon the club coerced all its members to leave the panel (for whatever reason). That's why the charge is about bringing the game into disrepute.

Rule 193 is a joke, but I don't think that's what the club is banned for.

The player themselves, as individuals, are not banned, is that correct?
Iím not sure they have evidence of that. Also, Rule 288 states Ďmemberí. How can they ban the entire club from the competition?

That's true. Maybe it's not 288 then. The rule underneath (292?) is interesting. It's like a catch all.

easytiger95

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1247
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #67 on: August 23, 2018, 01:56:14 PM »
I thought the punishment was against Carnacon because the charge was that Carnacon the club coerced all its members to leave the panel (for whatever reason). That's why the charge is about bringing the game into disrepute.

Rule 193 is a joke, but I don't think that's what the club is banned for.

The player themselves, as individuals, are not banned, is that correct?

You are right AZ, the journo from Mayo last night, McGreal, made that point - it wasn't individual players leaving a panel, it was done (allegedly) at the instigation of the club, and as such it could be judged as bringing the game into disrepute. The individuals are not banned but the club is - though effectively it is both.


hardstation

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25282
  • On a cold and misty morning on the Anagaire bridge
    • View Profile
    • gaaboard.com
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #68 on: August 23, 2018, 02:01:54 PM »
I thought the punishment was against Carnacon because the charge was that Carnacon the club coerced all its members to leave the panel (for whatever reason). That's why the charge is about bringing the game into disrepute.

Rule 193 is a joke, but I don't think that's what the club is banned for.

The player themselves, as individuals, are not banned, is that correct?
Iím not sure they have evidence of that. Also, Rule 288 states Ďmemberí. How can they ban the entire club from the competition?

That's true. Maybe it's not 288 then. The rule underneath (292?) is interesting. It's like a catch all.
Yes. Rule 292 - ďWe also have the power to make it up as we go along.Ē


RadioGAAGAA

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 856
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #69 on: August 23, 2018, 02:03:57 PM »
The 288 rule is fine but is not applicable in this case.

How on earth do you figure that?

A third of the panel walking off for false reasons (which would reflect poorly on the county setup) in the week leading up to a big game is not bringing the game into disrepute?
Leaving a panel is not bringing the game into disrepute.

In of itself it is not. But when timed to cause maximum disruption along with hinting at welfare as the reason(s) behind the withdrawal then it is bringing the Mayo board, the team management and the wider sport into disrepute.

That is clearly beyond argument.
i usse an speelchekor

hardstation

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25282
  • On a cold and misty morning on the Anagaire bridge
    • View Profile
    • gaaboard.com
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #70 on: August 23, 2018, 02:08:53 PM »
Itís not. Leaving a panel at any time is the playerís own free choice. Welfare is an entirely subjective point which canít be proven or disproven. ďBeing on this panel is having a negative effect on me therefore for my own welfare, I am leaving.Ē


Kickham csc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 287
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #71 on: August 23, 2018, 02:09:22 PM »
Thatís silly. The players from that club then just turn up and donít try an inch until they are dropped.
Thatís a crazy rule.

The only reason I know of this was because of an situation I experienced while playing with Antrim.

I picked up a serious injury (which finished my inter-county involvement), and as a result, I missed a NFL regulation playoff match against Fermanagh. My club had a league game that evening and sent a clubman down to take me to the club game (to be part of the management team)

After the Fermanagh game was over, the county chairman, sec, and county manager cornered me in the changing room at cited rules that would get the club sanctioned, and me suspended because, the county would see it as a refusal to play for the county so I could play a club game.

RadioGAAGAA

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 856
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #72 on: August 23, 2018, 02:22:34 PM »
Itís not. Leaving a panel at any time is the playerís own free choice. Welfare is an entirely subjective point which canít be proven or disproven. ďBeing on this panel is having a negative effect on me therefore for my own welfare, I am leaving.Ē

Your arse.

The fact that this saga has been rumbling on for weeks in the national press only proves beyond all doubt that it has indeed brought the game into disrepute.

The fact that all members of one club walked off simultaneously proves that it was not a personal decision.

The fact that players from any other club that left cited different (and differing) reasons decouples them from the argument.

The fact that the group players leaving promised statements in due course but never delivered any only proves they do not want the burden of proof of supposed welfare issues to fall on them.


But sure go ahead, argue that water isn't wet.
i usse an speelchekor

hardstation

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25282
  • On a cold and misty morning on the Anagaire bridge
    • View Profile
    • gaaboard.com
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #73 on: August 23, 2018, 02:29:42 PM »
Iím sorry but none of that constitutes bringing the association into disrepute for me.
Players left the panel and had their own reasons for doing so. Their reasons are none of anybodyís business really. The bottom line is that they didnít want to play for a team anymore. For me, they shouldnít be obliged to stay.
Association into disrepute is bollix. Catch a grip.


Syferus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15840
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #74 on: August 23, 2018, 02:43:33 PM »
Itís not. Leaving a panel at any time is the playerís own free choice. Welfare is an entirely subjective point which canít be proven or disproven. ďBeing on this panel is having a negative effect on me therefore for my own welfare, I am leaving.Ē

This is seems to be a failing between what you think should happen and what the rules that the players and the club were playing under. Any organisation can set its own rules as long as they are not illegal. These ones seem incredibly broad and cover a lot of eventualities. Thereís much less to see here with the ruling than you think.