Hurling 2024

[johnnycool]

"It's not just the removal of the helmet though, it's if you've to stop the play to allow a physio on at all."

If I have to stop play.

Though if a physio comes on and can administer a spray while play continues I'm happy with that, should I have to blow the whistle and the player requires assistance they have to go off, now seeing as it was my first real go at it, I waved the player on rather than waiting for a break, he was genuinely hurt from a tackle from the other team, its a bit unfair surely to disadvantage them twice? 

But is that not wrong, going by them new rules?

Completely

Bitta common sense needs to be applied and while I'm not against following it to the letter, sometimes it's actually counterproductive and not serving the reason why it's introduced

The reason for the new rules is to prevent cynical playacting,  faking injuries to slow the game down like nicky quaid getting something in his eye last year.
If its genuine then it's harsh but if they're acting the bollox then I'd make them wait for the next break in play.

[Delgany 2nds]

"It's not just the removal of the helmet though, it's if you've to stop the play to allow a physio on at all."

If I have to stop play.

Though if a physio comes on and can administer a spray while play continues I'm happy with that, should I have to blow the whistle and the player requires assistance they have to go off, now seeing as it was my first real go at it, I waved the player on rather than waiting for a break, he was genuinely hurt from a tackle from the other team, its a bit unfair surely to disadvantage them twice? 

But is that not wrong, going by them new rules?

Completely

Bitta common sense needs to be applied and while I'm not against following it to the letter, sometimes it's actually counterproductive and not serving the reason why it's introduced

The reason for the new rules is to prevent cynical playacting,  faking injuries to slow the game down like nicky quaid getting something in his eye last year.
If its genuine then it's harsh but if they're acting the bollox then I'd make them wait for the next break in play.

This rule was apparently amended during the week, to include the goalkeeper! Doesn't make much sense.

[marty34]

"It's not just the removal of the helmet though, it's if you've to stop the play to allow a physio on at all."

If I have to stop play.

Though if a physio comes on and can administer a spray while play continues I'm happy with that, should I have to blow the whistle and the player requires assistance they have to go off, now seeing as it was my first real go at it, I waved the player on rather than waiting for a break, he was genuinely hurt from a tackle from the other team, its a bit unfair surely to disadvantage them twice? 

But is that not wrong, going by them new rules?

Completely

Bitta common sense needs to be applied and while I'm not against following it to the letter, sometimes it's actually counterproductive and not serving the reason why it's introduced

The reason for the new rules is to prevent cynical playacting,  faking injuries to slow the game down like nicky quaid getting something in his eye last year.
If its genuine then it's harsh but if they're acting the bollox then I'd make them wait for the next break in play.

This rule was apparently amended during the week, to include the goalkeeper! Doesn't make much sense.

I said that a few weeks ago that to circumvent all this is for the keeper to go down. The rule didn't mention keepers.

I'd make it another player must stand i  goals and team down to 14 players until next break in play.

[johnnycool]

"It's not just the removal of the helmet though, it's if you've to stop the play to allow a physio on at all."

If I have to stop play.

Though if a physio comes on and can administer a spray while play continues I'm happy with that, should I have to blow the whistle and the player requires assistance they have to go off, now seeing as it was my first real go at it, I waved the player on rather than waiting for a break, he was genuinely hurt from a tackle from the other team, its a bit unfair surely to disadvantage them twice? 

But is that not wrong, going by them new rules?

Completely

Bitta common sense needs to be applied and while I'm not against following it to the letter, sometimes it's actually counterproductive and not serving the reason why it's introduced

The reason for the new rules is to prevent cynical playacting,  faking injuries to slow the game down like nicky quaid getting something in his eye last year.
If its genuine then it's harsh but if they're acting the bollox then I'd make them wait for the next break in play.

This rule was apparently amended during the week, to include the goalkeeper! Doesn't make much sense.

I said that a few weeks ago that to circumvent all this is for the keeper to go down. The rule didn't mention keepers.

I'd make it another player must stand i  goals and team down to 14 players until next break in play.

That is what is meant to happen even if there's a penalty to be taken, if the keeper receives treatment from the incident that led to the penalty being given they too need to leave the field of play until the next break in play or in MR2's case when he waves him back on...

 

Those frankies never were ones for following the rules.

[Milltown Row2]

The biggest problem I see with this is some players in the heat of the game will wave away any medical attention so that they can stay on the pitch, which in turn will lead to missed concussions or other injuries

The common sense approach would be for the team that has a player waiting to come on would be to knock the ball outta play as soon as possible so their player can come straight back on

Be some gurning soon especially come championship

[Saffrongael]

Jesus what a mistake by the umpire there in the U-20 game, Tipp keeper pushed the ball into the net there and no goal given

[Capt Pat]

I saw that, some howler by the umpire.

Also at the conclusion of the same game, a Cork player was through on goal just outside the penalty area and was taken out by the defender. There was no black card or penalty given. I assume they are not given at under 20 level. Cork pointed the free.

Tipp went straight down the field and scored the winning point. Cork had a lot of wides. They left it behind them.

[marty34]

I saw that, some howler by the umpire.

Also at the conclusion of the same game, a Cork player was through on goal just outside the penalty area and was taken out by the defender. There was no black card or penalty given. I assume they are not given at under 20 level. Cork pointed the free.

Tipp went straight down the field and scored the winning point. Cork had a lot of wides. They left it behind them.

Cork had too many wides, especially in the second half.

'Goal' for Cork was poor by the umpire. Should there be a lad watching the game on a tv in a room to tell the ref. ..kind of VAR?  That was a clear goal at a crucial time in a Munster Final

With that and minors winning Munster, Tipp are not too bad off. Like Kilkenny and Cork, they'll always have the hurlers.

Just looking at a few posts above, the rule about a player coming off/physio on seems to have passed by the wayside.

[Milltown Row2]

That is a sickening thing for Cork, it really is tough on teams, unfortunately those mistakes do happen, I've been on the end of those as a ref when the call or no call from the umpire results in controversy.

There's no play back and no immediate response as play continues.

In televised games if it's obvious, from an instant view on tv, then with ref's mic'd up he can be told to blow his whistle, walk very slowly towards his umpires, and a fourth or a fifth behind the scenes official has a look at the monitor.

He can rubber stamp the call and the right call is made.

People complaining about umpires size and sight, on occasions you are looking to see the ball go over the bar or if someone is stepping into the square or you blink and miss it.

The ref is only as good as the team around him! He'll carry the can for that one