Should An Glenn object?

[bannside]

All probable outcomes equate to a shitshow for the GAA, especially from a PR point of view. So many what ifs, possible counter objections, difficulty with dates, county season started, players on long awaited holidays after long season....this could run for months. All the time the anti GAA brigade, especially the D4 rugger set, will be licking their lips.

The only way out for the GAA (not for Glen I emphasise) is for this to "go away" quietly and that can only happen if Glen publicly drop their appeal. Preferably in a non acrimonious manner.

Expect the Glen squad and management team to be heading off on a hot weather training camp for a week at Easter.....

That's where the smart money lies, imo.

[seafoid]

The question going forward is do we start replaying games when there are faults made by officials? More serious ones that this happen all the time.

The issue here is that the rule book actually covers what happened with penalties stipulated. There is nothing to say there will be penalties if a ref doesn't give a penalty when he should or sends someone off wrongly etc.

It is irrelevant that Crokes did nothing wrong, the rule is clear about having only 15 players on the pitch, nevertheless the CCC have to examine the circumstances of that extra man being on the pitch. IMO it's clear enough that Glenn were disadvantaged by having to play against 16 players in that last play, however marginal that disadvantage

It's a proven fact that  Crokes had 16 players, the circumstance of that only allow for 3 penalties,  whether Crokes forfeit the game, a replay or a fine.  Imo the fine is out of the question therefore it's likely a replay  more than a forfeiture.

why is the fine out of the question? the rule mentions 'circumstances .   if Glen knew there was 16, why take the 45, why not wait until the ref did his job. the players didnt know there was the extra man. it didn't  figured into the decision of the 45 to go short or the shot to go where it did IMO... I think fine is likely, maybe after some DRA involvement.

Good point. If you accept for the sake of argument that Crokes did wrong (which as MR2 has explained and I agreed with, I don't accept, as I don't see anything they could have done differently to alert the player standing on the line that he was being taken off, given how quick the ref allowed the re-start)

But if you do, then the punishment depends on the "circumstances". So given the actual circumstances, is it possible to work out what was the most likely outcome?

Either the lads remaining on the line would have stood a little further away from each other to cover the gap left by Mullin, or more likely, an extra body would have dropped back, leaving one fewer body out the field.

The 45 was played short. It's reasonably clear that the 45 would have been taken short had Kilmacud only 15 men.  Either Kilmacud would have had the same men in the same positions out the field, or one less man out there, either way a reasonable person would conclude the most likely scenario is the tactic would not have changed.

When the recipient received the ball, two Glen players immediately entered the square. The full back on the near side and another player on the far side. Hard to know why they did this, but not unusual in the heat of the moment, and really no reason they would do anything differently in the revised scenario.

Therefore, "in the circumstances", it was pretty much impossible for Glen to score a legal goal.

This is bollocks. Top level club players react to circumstances and opportunities.
Fortress Kilmacud could have been tested with a lob into the square.

The game was undecided when the 45 was kicked.

[trailer]

The question going forward is do we start replaying games when there are faults made by officials? More serious ones that this happen all the time.

The issue here is that the rule book actually covers what happened with penalties stipulated. There is nothing to say there will be penalties if a ref doesn't give a penalty when he should or sends someone off wrongly etc.

It is irrelevant that Crokes did nothing wrong, the rule is clear about having only 15 players on the pitch, nevertheless the CCC have to examine the circumstances of that extra man being on the pitch. IMO it's clear enough that Glenn were disadvantaged by having to play against 16 players in that last play, however marginal that disadvantage

It's a proven fact that  Crokes had 16 players, the circumstance of that only allow for 3 penalties,  whether Crokes forfeit the game, a replay or a fine.  Imo the fine is out of the question therefore it's likely a replay  more than a forfeiture.

why is the fine out of the question? the rule mentions 'circumstances .   if Glen knew there was 16, why take the 45, why not wait until the ref did his job. the players didnt know there was the extra man. it didn't  figured into the decision of the 45 to go short or the shot to go where it did IMO... I think fine is likely, maybe after some DRA involvement.

Good point. If you accept for the sake of argument that Crokes did wrong (which as MR2 has explained and I agreed with, I don't accept, as I don't see anything they could have done differently to alert the player standing on the line that he was being taken off, given how quick the ref allowed the re-start)

But if you do, then the punishment depends on the "circumstances". So given the actual circumstances, is it possible to work out what was the most likely outcome?

Either the lads remaining on the line would have stood a little further away from each other to cover the gap left by Mullin, or more likely, an extra body would have dropped back, leaving one fewer body out the field.

The 45 was played short. It's reasonably clear that the 45 would have been taken short had Kilmacud only 15 men.  Either Kilmacud would have had the same men in the same positions out the field, or one less man out there, either way a reasonable person would conclude the most likely scenario is the tactic would not have changed.

When the recipient received the ball, two Glen players immediately entered the square. The full back on the near side and another player on the far side. Hard to know why they did this, but not unusual in the heat of the moment, and really no reason they would do anything differently in the revised scenario.

Therefore, "in the circumstances", it was pretty much impossible for Glen to score a legal goal.

This is bollocks. Top level club players react to circumstances and opportunities.
Fortress Kilmacud could have been tested with a lob into the square.

The game was undecided when the 45 was kicked.

No replay but I'd give Glen 10 45s against 15 men.

Bet they still wouldn't score.

[Armagh18]

The question going forward is do we start replaying games when there are faults made by officials? More serious ones that this happen all the time.

The issue here is that the rule book actually covers what happened with penalties stipulated. There is nothing to say there will be penalties if a ref doesn't give a penalty when he should or sends someone off wrongly etc.

It is irrelevant that Crokes did nothing wrong, the rule is clear about having only 15 players on the pitch, nevertheless the CCC have to examine the circumstances of that extra man being on the pitch. IMO it's clear enough that Glenn were disadvantaged by having to play against 16 players in that last play, however marginal that disadvantage

It's a proven fact that  Crokes had 16 players, the circumstance of that only allow for 3 penalties,  whether Crokes forfeit the game, a replay or a fine.  Imo the fine is out of the question therefore it's likely a replay  more than a forfeiture.

why is the fine out of the question? the rule mentions 'circumstances .   if Glen knew there was 16, why take the 45, why not wait until the ref did his job. the players didnt know there was the extra man. it didn't  figured into the decision of the 45 to go short or the shot to go where it did IMO... I think fine is likely, maybe after some DRA involvement.

Good point. If you accept for the sake of argument that Crokes did wrong (which as MR2 has explained and I agreed with, I don't accept, as I don't see anything they could have done differently to alert the player standing on the line that he was being taken off, given how quick the ref allowed the re-start)

But if you do, then the punishment depends on the "circumstances". So given the actual circumstances, is it possible to work out what was the most likely outcome?

Either the lads remaining on the line would have stood a little further away from each other to cover the gap left by Mullin, or more likely, an extra body would have dropped back, leaving one fewer body out the field.

The 45 was played short. It's reasonably clear that the 45 would have been taken short had Kilmacud only 15 men.  Either Kilmacud would have had the same men in the same positions out the field, or one less man out there, either way a reasonable person would conclude the most likely scenario is the tactic would not have changed.

When the recipient received the ball, two Glen players immediately entered the square. The full back on the near side and another player on the far side. Hard to know why they did this, but not unusual in the heat of the moment, and really no reason they would do anything differently in the revised scenario.

Therefore, "in the circumstances", it was pretty much impossible for Glen to score a legal goal.

I'm sorry but that is absolute bullshit. You me or no one else can say what would have happened if it was played 15 v15 in the first place or if it had been retaken as it should have been. Unlikely yes but certainly not impossible as has been seen countless times in matches up and down the country!

[seafoid]

Decision at lunchtime
KC unwilling to play a replay

Per OTB

[trueblue1234]

Decision at lunchtime
KC unwilling to play a replay

Per OTB

I hope this isn't true. Would be disappointed if it was the case. If that is the case, GAA should just declare the final null and award neither the f**king cup.

[imtommygunn]

I can't see how this goes to a replay. Did someone not say Walsh is in america and then glen boys are back playing with Derry and I'm sure some dubs are back too. I just don't think logistically it will work. I expect some half assed apology and that be that tbh. There's no way they could award it to Glen. They wouldn't want that either.

[smort]

Decision at lunchtime
KC unwilling to play a replay

Per OTB

I hope this isn't true. Would be disappointed if it was the case. If that is the case, GAA should just declare the final null and award neither the f**king cup.

I think this will be the outcome

[Armagh18]

Decision at lunchtime
KC unwilling to play a replay

Per OTB

I hope this isn't true. Would be disappointed if it was the case. If that is the case, GAA should just declare the final null and award neither the f**king cup.

I see where they're coming from. Whole thing is a disaster and unfair on both sets of players. I'm sure the lads had been living like monks for months in preparation of this and made huge sacrifices to enable them to be at peak performance. By now they're back to normal life, unfair to ask them to go back to that level.

[WT4E]

Decision at lunchtime
KC unwilling to play a replay

Per OTB

I hope this isn't true. Would be disappointed if it was the case. If that is the case, GAA should just declare the final null and award neither the f**king cup.

What happens if KC do this?

Trophy is awarded to Glen?

If Glen then say we don't want it this way - they give it back to KC? They void the season?

[pjm]

[/quote]

This is bollocks. Top level club players react to circumstances and opportunities.
Fortress Kilmacud could have been tested with a lob into the square.

The game was undecided when the 45 was kicked.
[/quote]

No replay but I'd give Glen 10 45s against 15 men.

Bet they still wouldn't score.
[/quote]
Didn't Kilcoo score a goal from a 45 last year?

[seafoid]

This is not a ref issue. 16 players is a rules issue

The CCCC can't try to find a compromise  if KC won't agree to a replay.
You can't find a compromise with rules. It's one or the other.

A very difficult fudge for the GAA. #seniorhurling

[trueblue1234]

There's no way out for the GAA. If either team is unwilling to play the replay then void it. Circus has went on long enough.

[Gold]

The question going forward is do we start replaying games when there are faults made by officials? More serious ones that this happen all the time.

The issue here is that the rule book actually covers what happened with penalties stipulated. There is nothing to say there will be penalties if a ref doesn't give a penalty when he should or sends someone off wrongly etc.

It is irrelevant that Crokes did nothing wrong, the rule is clear about having only 15 players on the pitch, nevertheless the CCC have to examine the circumstances of that extra man being on the pitch. IMO it's clear enough that Glenn were disadvantaged by having to play against 16 players in that last play, however marginal that disadvantage

It's a proven fact that  Crokes had 16 players, the circumstance of that only allow for 3 penalties,  whether Crokes forfeit the game, a replay or a fine.  Imo the fine is out of the question therefore it's likely a replay  more than a forfeiture.

why is the fine out of the question? the rule mentions 'circumstances .   if Glen knew there was 16, why take the 45, why not wait until the ref did his job. the players didnt know there was the extra man. it didn't  figured into the decision of the 45 to go short or the shot to go where it did IMO... I think fine is likely, maybe after some DRA involvement.

Good point. If you accept for the sake of argument that Crokes did wrong (which as MR2 has explained and I agreed with, I don't accept, as I don't see anything they could have done differently to alert the player standing on the line that he was being taken off, given how quick the ref allowed the re-start)

But if you do, then the punishment depends on the "circumstances". So given the actual circumstances, is it possible to work out what was the most likely outcome?

Either the lads remaining on the line would have stood a little further away from each other to cover the gap left by Mullin, or more likely, an extra body would have dropped back, leaving one fewer body out the field.

The 45 was played short. It's reasonably clear that the 45 would have been taken short had Kilmacud only 15 men.  Either Kilmacud would have had the same men in the same positions out the field, or one less man out there, either way a reasonable person would conclude the most likely scenario is the tactic would not have changed.

When the recipient received the ball, two Glen players immediately entered the square. The full back on the near side and another player on the far side. Hard to know why they did this, but not unusual in the heat of the moment, and really no reason they would do anything differently in the revised scenario.

Therefore, "in the circumstances", it was pretty much impossible for Glen to score a legal goal.

This is bollocks. Top level club players react to circumstances and opportunities.
Fortress Kilmacud could have been tested with a lob into the square.

The game was undecided when the 45 was kicked.

No replay but I'd give Glen 10 45s against 15 men.

Bet they still wouldn't score.

I'd give them a penalty for a player encroaching at the 45. Penalties given out for fouls out the field so what odds

[imtommygunn]

There's no way out for the GAA. If either team is unwilling to play the replay then void it. Circus has went on long enough.

Yeah I don't think there's a way they can get out of this without looking extremely bad. If they were to have a replay then they'd to act quickly and they didn't. Damage now done.