AISF Mayo v Dublin

[muppet]

from the Rule book

not sure why people are referring to  the Fact it Was a fist in the Rules only hand is mentioned and no mention is made with it is to the body or Face,

Technicaly Both should have gone but in the real world neither should have been sent off

from the rule book

Immediate Ordering Off Infractions (Red Cards)
1. Striking or attempting to strike with arm, elbow, hand, knee or head.
2. Kicking or attempting to kick with minimal force or with force or causing injury.
3. Behaving in any way which is dangerous to an opponent.
4. Spitting at an opponent.
5. Contributing to a melee.
6. Stamping.
7. Inflicting injury recklessly.
8. Abusive language towards a Referee, Umpire, Linesman or Sideline Official.

You do realise there's a difference between a strike, a grab and a push.

Murphy PUSHES Keane in the chest and then GRABS a hold of his jersey. Keane punches Murphy on the butt of his chin.

You know those doors with no handles and the small metal push sign? Do you strike them open?

Actually, there isn't a difference between a strike and a push for our purposes.

In the dictionary the only difference between a strike and a push, is that the latter causes the object to move.

But a push fulfils the definition of a strike. Both require force and both require contact. Force + contact = a strike.

It does make a difference in the GAA rule book, not sure what you meant by "our purposes". Pushing is one type of foul, resulting in a free kick. Striking is a different foul resulting in a red card.

The weakness here is in the rule book, and in particular with language, so I am not having a go at you.

But by definition you cannot push someone without striking them. Equally you can't slap or punch someone without striking them either.

We could break down every word for its exact meaning. How would you state it in the rule book for both fouls?
For example you can't use punch as there many different ways of striking with the hand.
I guess it is getting balance between legal talk and what your average GAA person will understand.
I think every GAA person knows the difference between and push and a strike. Not sure why you have raised it.

I raised it to point out the difficulties there can be for refs.

Most pushes are strikes as well and should be sendings off. But it never happens as somehow a push is completely acceptable. Even after the whistle is gone.

For example I will say this against my own county man:



There was outrage over this 'push'.

We can all see it was a push. But it is also a strike on the other player by both hands. Beyond that, it looks terrible, is always likely to start a row and should have no place in the game. But it is almost never punished.

One exception was Ger Brennan in the clip I posted from the end 2011 Final had a free changed to a throw ball. The ref actually took action, unusually, but it was a 'strike' to the face. As I said, there wasn't much power and if Donaghy hadn't have gone down like he was punched the ref might have done more.

If players got carded for a push that involves an aggressive strike, they might think about piling in after a contentious free.

[macdanger2]

True but if you're talking about what a GAA person would think is a striking offence (or indeed a sending off offence), would Keane's slap be worthy of a red card? For me it's not since there was no real malice in it but by the letter of the law it is a red.

It seems like the letter of the law (in certain instances at least) is applied a lot more in football than in hurling where intent seems to be considered

[muppet]

True but if you're talking about what a GAA person would think is a striking offence (or indeed a sending off offence), would Keane's slap be worthy of a red card? For me it's not since there was no real malice in it but by the letter of the law it is a red.

It seems like the letter of the law (in certain instances at least) is applied a lot more in football than in hurling where intent seems to be considered

I agree about Keane, there was no malice, but it was a red card. The letter of the law has to be the best interpretation, otherwise we end up with chaos. If the letter of the law is the problem, and I accept that it may be, then re-write it.

[Stall the Bailer]

For me using today's rules I would say that is a yellow card for rough play in that clip.

[muppet]

For me using today's rules I would say that is a yellow card for rough play in that clip.

I would be happy to see a yellow card given every time. But it is very rare you see a ref do it. There should also have been a yellow for Dolan's dive. Look as his legs as he is being hit.

[moysider]

from the Rule book

not sure why people are referring to  the Fact it Was a fist in the Rules only hand is mentioned and no mention is made with it is to the body or Face,

Technicaly Both should have gone but in the real world neither should have been sent off

from the rule book

Immediate Ordering Off Infractions (Red Cards)
1. Striking or attempting to strike with arm, elbow, hand, knee or head.
2. Kicking or attempting to kick with minimal force or with force or causing injury.
3. Behaving in any way which is dangerous to an opponent.
4. Spitting at an opponent.
5. Contributing to a melee.
6. Stamping.
7. Inflicting injury recklessly.
8. Abusive language towards a Referee, Umpire, Linesman or Sideline Official.

You do realise there's a difference between a strike, a grab and a push.

Murphy PUSHES Keane in the chest and then GRABS a hold of his jersey. Keane punches Murphy on the butt of his chin.

You know those doors with no handles and the small metal push sign? Do you strike them open?

Actually, there isn't a difference between a strike and a push for our purposes.

In the dictionary the only difference between a strike and a push, is that the latter causes the object to move.

But a push fulfils the definition of a strike. Both require force and both require contact. Force + contact = a strike.

It does make a difference in the GAA rule book, not sure what you meant by "our purposes". Pushing is one type of foul, resulting in a free kick. Striking is a different foul resulting in a red card.

Not if there is a break in play it's not. Then it is violent conduct and a card may be shown.

There is nothing in the rule mentioning about a break in play. A foul can be aggressive (includes cynical), dissent or technical. There is also no violent conduct rule. You must be working of a different rule book.
If the push is dangerous then it could come under rule 5.17 "To behave in any way which is dangerous to an opponent." Another more serious one is if he causes injury.
You will only get a straight red card for a push if it falls under these rules. An example would be deliberately pushing a player into the fence with aim of hurting him.

Sheesh! No need to be a smart ass about it.

Murphy grabs an opponents jersey and pushes him aggressively during a break in play and that's ok!

How about contributing to a melee so? Or are you going to argue that trying to start a melee doesn t count and isn t exactly 'contributing'.

[rosnarun]

We could break down every word for its exact meaning. How would you state it in the rule book for both fouls?
For example you can't use punch as there many different ways of striking with the hand.
I guess it is getting balance between legal talk and what your average GAA person will understand.
I think every GAA person knows the difference between and push and a strike. Not sure why you have raised it.

that is exactly what happens in an appeal . Teams look for every loophole possible. I think the reason Keane got off was the referees report did not agree with  the action ,
maybe the ref said he struck with a closed fist I stead of an open hand,
they would show he never saw the incident and was not in a position to make a judgment ,
Was it anthony lynch who got off on the basis that he missed his attempt to strike , a sending off offence, but the ref reported a an actual strike,

[Stall the Bailer]

from the Rule book

not sure why people are referring to  the Fact it Was a fist in the Rules only hand is mentioned and no mention is made with it is to the body or Face,

Technicaly Both should have gone but in the real world neither should have been sent off

from the rule book

Immediate Ordering Off Infractions (Red Cards)
1. Striking or attempting to strike with arm, elbow, hand, knee or head.
2. Kicking or attempting to kick with minimal force or with force or causing injury.
3. Behaving in any way which is dangerous to an opponent.
4. Spitting at an opponent.
5. Contributing to a melee.
6. Stamping.
7. Inflicting injury recklessly.
8. Abusive language towards a Referee, Umpire, Linesman or Sideline Official.

You do realise there's a difference between a strike, a grab and a push.

Murphy PUSHES Keane in the chest and then GRABS a hold of his jersey. Keane punches Murphy on the butt of his chin.

You know those doors with no handles and the small metal push sign? Do you strike them open?

Actually, there isn't a difference between a strike and a push for our purposes.

In the dictionary the only difference between a strike and a push, is that the latter causes the object to move.

But a push fulfils the definition of a strike. Both require force and both require contact. Force + contact = a strike.

It does make a difference in the GAA rule book, not sure what you meant by "our purposes". Pushing is one type of foul, resulting in a free kick. Striking is a different foul resulting in a red card.

Not if there is a break in play it's not. Then it is violent conduct and a card may be shown.

There is nothing in the rule mentioning about a break in play. A foul can be aggressive (includes cynical), dissent or technical. There is also no violent conduct rule. You must be working of a different rule book.
If the push is dangerous then it could come under rule 5.17 "To behave in any way which is dangerous to an opponent." Another more serious one is if he causes injury.
You will only get a straight red card for a push if it falls under these rules. An example would be deliberately pushing a player into the fence with aim of hurting him.

Sheesh! No need to be a smart ass about it.

Murphy grabs an opponents jersey and pushes him aggressively during a break in play and that's ok!

How about contributing to a melee so? Or are you going to argue that trying to start a melee doesn t count and isn t exactly 'contributing'.

I wasn't trying to be smart ass about it at all, just stating what the rules were and pointing out there were no rules to cover what you were suggesting.

I believe a big problem in our games is referees not implementing the rules fully as they currently are.
The rule book should not be used as ad hoc guideline where we pick and choose parts of it and try to shoehorn incidents into rules they are not meant for. The rules need to have as little grey areas as possible.

This poor implementation of rules by referees leads to an inconsistency of how our games are played. You can see players get frustrated when something could be a foul one game and not the next. This then results in dissent from the players and those on side lines or those spectating shouting roaring like lunatics, saying it was/wasn't a foul and losing control of themselves. It also discourages players from committing certain fouls as they know they will probably get away with it.

A few examples of referees not implementing the rules correctly would be,

Diving – how often have you seen a referee award a yellow card for diving, I can't think of any examples at inter-county level.

Black fouls pre-introduction of the black cards – the black card fouls were all yellow card offences before the black card was introduced. The refs rarely awarded yellow cards for these fouls any was why you had a lot of body checking etc.

[Stall the Bailer]

from the Rule book

not sure why people are referring to  the Fact it Was a fist in the Rules only hand is mentioned and no mention is made with it is to the body or Face,

Technicaly Both should have gone but in the real world neither should have been sent off

from the rule book

Immediate Ordering Off Infractions (Red Cards)
1. Striking or attempting to strike with arm, elbow, hand, knee or head.
2. Kicking or attempting to kick with minimal force or with force or causing injury.
3. Behaving in any way which is dangerous to an opponent.
4. Spitting at an opponent.
5. Contributing to a melee.
6. Stamping.
7. Inflicting injury recklessly.
8. Abusive language towards a Referee, Umpire, Linesman or Sideline Official.

You do realise there's a difference between a strike, a grab and a push.

Murphy PUSHES Keane in the chest and then GRABS a hold of his jersey. Keane punches Murphy on the butt of his chin.

You know those doors with no handles and the small metal push sign? Do you strike them open?

Actually, there isn't a difference between a strike and a push for our purposes.

In the dictionary the only difference between a strike and a push, is that the latter causes the object to move.

But a push fulfils the definition of a strike. Both require force and both require contact. Force + contact = a strike.

It does make a difference in the GAA rule book, not sure what you meant by "our purposes". Pushing is one type of foul, resulting in a free kick. Striking is a different foul resulting in a red card.

Not if there is a break in play it's not. Then it is violent conduct and a card may be shown.

There is nothing in the rule mentioning about a break in play. A foul can be aggressive (includes cynical), dissent or technical. There is also no violent conduct rule. You must be working of a different rule book.
If the push is dangerous then it could come under rule 5.17 "To behave in any way which is dangerous to an opponent." Another more serious one is if he causes injury.
You will only get a straight red card for a push if it falls under these rules. An example would be deliberately pushing a player into the fence with aim of hurting him.

Sheesh! No need to be a smart ass about it.

Murphy grabs an opponents jersey and pushes him aggressively during a break in play and that's ok!

How about contributing to a melee so? Or are you going to argue that trying to start a melee doesn t count and isn t exactly 'contributing'.

From the rules the referee could gave a free against Murphy for a push. If he thought it was rough play then it would be a yellow as well. If he thought it was dangerous to Keane then he could have gave him a red.

My understanding of melee is more than two players. When the third players comes in they are the ones contributing to a melee. Two players in a confrontation will usually be easily dealt with and it will break up quick enough. This all changes when the third player enters.

I'm curious how you got your viewpoint on these. Is it your interpretation of reading the rule book, or do think the current rules should be altered to what you have said?

[Stall the Bailer]

We could break down every word for its exact meaning. How would you state it in the rule book for both fouls?
For example you can't use punch as there many different ways of striking with the hand.
I guess it is getting balance between legal talk and what your average GAA person will understand.
I think every GAA person knows the difference between and push and a strike. Not sure why you have raised it.

that is exactly what happens in an appeal . Teams look for every loophole possible. I think the reason Keane got off was the referees report did not agree with  the action ,
maybe the ref said he struck with a closed fist I stead of an open hand,
they would show he never saw the incident and was not in a position to make a judgment ,
Was it anthony lynch who got off on the basis that he missed his attempt to strike , a sending off offence, but the ref reported a an actual strike,

I hope it was a technicality as it appeared a straight red offence. You wouldn't want to see all strikes now being yellow cards.
Putting striking with fist in the report would get you off as there no mention of fist in the rules. It would need to be striking with the hand. 
If I remember correctly, it was the umpire who seen it, probably something lost in communication here that resulted in a mistake in the report.

[westbound]

We could break down every word for its exact meaning. How would you state it in the rule book for both fouls?
For example you can't use punch as there many different ways of striking with the hand.
I guess it is getting balance between legal talk and what your average GAA person will understand.
I think every GAA person knows the difference between and push and a strike. Not sure why you have raised it.

that is exactly what happens in an appeal . Teams look for every loophole possible. I think the reason Keane got off was the referees report did not agree with  the action ,
maybe the ref said he struck with a closed fist I stead of an open hand,
they would show he never saw the incident and was not in a position to make a judgment ,
Was it anthony lynch who got off on the basis that he missed his attempt to strike , a sending off offence, but the ref reported a an actual strike,

I hope it was a technicality as it appeared a straight red offence. You would want to see all strikes now being yellow cards.
Putting striking with fist in the report would get you off as there no mention of fist in the rules. It would need to be striking with the hand. 
If I remember correctly, it was the umpire who seen it, probably something lost in communication here that resulted in a mistake in the report.

If keane got off on a technicality, a rule needs to be brought in whereby the CCCC (or what ever is the relevant committee) is permitted to change the charge as appropriate.

What I mean by that (I haven't worded it very well) is that where it is clear that a sending off offence was committed the player involved should be suspended accordingly regardless of what technicality wasn't fulfilled.
E.g. if the referee's report said 'strike with the fist' and the actual offence was 'strike with the hand' then in my opinion no player should get off just because the ref used the wrong word in his report.

It's time to stop letting players get off on technicalities!

I know it's being going on for years but what's the point in having a rule book if it's not going to be implemented.

It appears at the rule book is more a 'guideline' than a 'rule' book!

[AZOffaly]

We had a similar, and just as boring, discussion on the hurling side of the house about Joe Canning's 'strike' and whether it was a red given the way the rule book is worded.

As with a lot of the rules, it's the ambiguous wording, or the fact that it has to be interpreted, which causes the problems.

AS we've said probably for the past 8-10 years, a full, legally reviewed, rewrite of the rules is what is needed.

[Syferus]

Left to your own devices ye always manage to turn the conversation to Roscommon somehow.

[Rossfan]

Left to your own devices ye always manage to turn the conversation to Roscommon somehow.

??/

[Syferus]

Left to your own devices ye always manage to turn the conversation to Roscommon somehow.

??/

Scroll up on the page. Look for primrose. You're welcome.