What should be done about the Leinster Final Fiasco?

[Hound]

Just had a thought 

If the ref says he would have awarded a penalty had the goal not stood, why not bring them back tomorrow for the penalty! If a goal is scored, Meath win, if the Meath lad takes his point its a replay, and if its a save then Louth win. Last kick of the game, so no rebound - all you'll need is two lads!

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

Just had a thought 

If the ref says he would have awarded a penalty had the goal not stood, why not bring them back tomorrow for the penalty! If a goal is scored, Meath win, if the Meath lad takes his point its a replay, and if its a save then Louth win. Last kick of the game, so no rebound - all you'll need is two lads!

They would have 84,000 to watch it too 

[KeithCarroll23]

It has .. if you can remember Roscommon Mionrs played galway in a connacht final in 1989 in castlebar. Roscommon were down to with on 1 point of galway with the last seconds to go.. then Roscommon got a peno. the roscommon playier was told to pop it over to draw the game... everone bar the peno taker was outside the 21 yard line.. but another roscommon player had other ideas... and ran up and scored a goal... ther was now 2 roscommon players inside the 21yard line but the goal stood... the ref even spoke to the umpire and the goal was allowed.... the galway players protested.. and got a replay..... roscommon still went on to win the replay.... same thing a goal that was that should not hav been... but there was a replay

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

It has .. if you can remember Roscommon Mionrs played galway in a connacht final in 1989 in castlebar. Roscommon were down to with on 1 point of galway with the last seconds to go.. then Roscommon got a peno. the roscommon playier was told to pop it over to draw the game... everone bar the peno taker was outside the 21 yard line.. but another roscommon player had other ideas... and ran up and scored a goal... ther was now 2 roscommon players inside the 21yard line but the goal stood... the ref even spoke to the umpire and the goal was allowed.... the galway players protested.. and got a replay..... roscommon still went on to win the replay.... same thing a goal that was that should not hav been... but there was a replay

I remember that alright, crazy stuff, was listening to it on Mid West.

[Rossfan]

Werent Galway awarded the game officially by the connacht Council as  the ref had disallowed the goal??
Then if I remember correctly Galway agreed to a replay.
Cake Curran  was the man who took the penalty.

[muppet]

It has .. if you can remember Roscommon Mionrs played galway in a connacht final in 1989 in castlebar. Roscommon were down to with on 1 point of galway with the last seconds to go.. then Roscommon got a peno. the roscommon playier was told to pop it over to draw the game... everone bar the peno taker was outside the 21 yard line.. but another roscommon player had other ideas... and ran up and scored a goal... ther was now 2 roscommon players inside the 21yard line but the goal stood... the ref even spoke to the umpire and the goal was allowed.... the galway players protested.. and got a replay..... roscommon still went on to win the replay.... same thing a goal that was that should not hav been... but there was a replay

Just posted this on the other thread. The goal was disallowed by the ref. I was a steward that day and knew players on both teams.

[mrgaa1]

BTW umpires at these games are trained.  The ref can't pick four friends and bring them down the road.  They have to be pre-approved and trained.  I haven't seen any of what happened yet but what is most worrying are the pitch invasion stories.
There are 10's of thousands week in, week out at soccer match's (over 84,000 at the world cup final tonight) and yet they don't invade.  In todays match programme (Fermanagh v. Armagh) Sean Cavanagh talks about his experiences of pitch invasions from a players point of view. 
We all need to cop ourselves on from here on in from the smallest club unit through to county boards and drive home the directive - no pitch invasions before someone gets killed - be they a player, official or supporter.
The rules are very clear about how goals can be scored and you can not throw the ball over the line BUT if you are in possession of the ball and fall you can play the ball and score provided the ball is within your vicinity.  You can't fall down and play the ball that you were not on possession of.
So I'll see it later and then make my own mind up.  Unfortunately there is no recourse in 99.9999% of games to reverse a scoreline - no matter how unkind it may appear.  Does anyone have the stats on the game?  Wides, shots for both teams???

[OverThePostsAWide]

I cannot understand why people are giving out about the umpires. They have absolutely no authority and are there to assist the referee only. If the referee saw the incident clearly then he showed an alarming lack of knowledge of the rules of the game and shouldn t be refereeing at this level.

Agree 100%

My biggest beef is his sheer arrogance in the immediate aftermath. He didnt consult the umpire- he told him to raise the green flag. He should have taken his time and consulted BOTH umpires before making a decisions. Why didn't he do this?

OK, here is where I am going to disagree ...even with myself from earlier posts 

On reflection, there is no such authority given to umpires (or linesmen) in the Official Guide. They are not proto referees (reinforced by the fact that they don't have to be "qualified" in any way). They have very limited authority as to what they adjudicate on (wide, score, 45, etc.). The referee can overrule their adjudications. An additional duty for umpires is:

(ii) The umpires shall bring to the notice of
the referee, during a break in play, any
instances of foul play in particular, rough or
dangerous play, striking, hitting, or kicking, or
unauthorised incursions onto the field of play,
which have not been noticed by the Referee.

While "foul play" could technically include square balls, foul throws, etc. I don't think that is the intention of this part. It is more clearly intended to cover the typical "off-the-ball" instances that the referee misses. And probably more for the application of retrospective cards, not live adjudication as it were.

i.e. the referee, and the referee alone, decides the "run of play" infractions. Ask yourself, have you in recent times ever seen an intercounty referee consult with an umpire over any on-the-ball "foul" for a second opinion? (or, more to the point, even a linesman, who would be qualified).

I suspect the umpires didn't have the authority to adjudicate on the legitimacy of the goal. I also think Sludden didn't have the authority to consult their view other than "was it over the line?". Otherwise, umpires would be required to be "qualified referees" which they are not.

Should be changed, perhaps, but how would that work in your typical club match? 

I have come to the conclusion that Sludden was just incompetent in missing the square ball and the throw but not necessarily arrogant for not consulting his umpires 

(if it has been reported correctly that he said that he should have given a penalty instead then I would add "weak" to the charge sheet  )

[Zulu]

While "foul play" could technically include square balls, foul throws, etc. I don't think that is the intention of this part. It is more clearly intended to cover the typical "off-the-ball" instances that the referee misses. And probably more for the application of retrospective cards, not live adjudication as it were.

i.e. the referee, and the referee alone, decides the "run of play" infractions. Ask yourself, have you in recent times ever seen an intercounty referee consult with an umpire over any on-the-ball "foul"? (or, more to the point, even a linesman, who would be qualified).

In an U21 Munster hurling final 2 years ago a goalie was penalised for taking a puckout from outside the small square and it was the umpire who called this. So it appears that they can get involved with these type of technical fouls.

Should be changed, perhaps, but how would that work in your typical club match?

Club and IC should be dealt with separately, there are a lot of things that don't happen at club level (e.g. linesmen) that are standard at IC level.

I have come to the conclusion that Sludden was just incompetent in missing the square ball and the throw but not necessarily arrogant for not consulting his umpires

He should have asked them what they saw IMO and then adjudicated on the merits of that.

[KeithCarroll23]

sorry I was there as well .. the goal was allowed for roscommon... thats fact.... the ref blew the final whistle any to misallow a goal both umpires have to walk into the middle of the goal the cross their flags.... that is also fact

[muppet]

sorry I was there as well .. the goal was allowed for roscommon... thats fact.... the ref blew the final whistle any to misallow a goal both umpires have to walk into the middle of the goal the cross their flags.... that is also fact

Roscommon thought the goal was allowed. It wasn't.

Umpires not doing their job correctly is hardly surprising is it?

[OverThePostsAWide]

In an U21 Munster hurling final 2 years ago a goalie was penalised for taking a puckout from outside the small square and it was the umpire who called this.

How did that work Zulu? Did the referee stop the game as soon as the umpire's flag went up or did he wait until the next break in play and then bring the game back? Neither are allowed for in the rules.

So it appears that they can get involved with these type of technical fouls.

Of course, anything can happen  But if it was legitimate, would you not expect to see it happen routinely particularly at senior level?

Club and IC should be dealt with separately, there are a lot of things that don't happen at club level (e.g. linesmen) that are standard at IC level.

Don't understand the linesmen bit, but any differences (e.g. time) are explicitly covered in the rules. No?

He should have asked them what they saw IMO and then adjudicated on the merits of that.

I thought that initially, and I have some sympathy for that view, but can you show me where it is allowed for in the rules?

[Zulu]

How did that work Zulu? Did the referee stop the game as soon as the umpire's flag went up or did he wait until the next break in play and then bring the game back? Neither are allowed for in the rules.

No, the game went on and Clare won a free, which they scored to put them in the lead with time almost up. The ref then saw the umpire with the hand up and he went down to him was told what had happened and then cancelled the free and instead gave a 65 to Tipp which they pointed and won the game from. That might not be quite the exact series of events but it is basically what happened, the only bit I'm unsure of is the Clare free, but the play did go on and the ref did call it back.

Of course, anything can happen  But if it was legitimate, would you not expect to see it happen routinely particularly at senior level?

Yeah I'm not sure if it is legitimate, just saying it has happened. Which I suppose just highlights the confusion that reigns.

Don't understand the linesmen bit, but any differences (e.g. time) are explicitly covered in the rules. No?

I've often played in games without any linesmen at club level, or at best the linesman (or umpires) are not neutral so I think we should bring something into the IC game if it benefits the game at that level even if it isn't practical at club level.

I thought that initially, and I have some sympathy for that view, but can you show me where it is allowed for in the rules?

I can't but I don't think it is prohibited in the rules, is it?

Would this part of the rule you posted not cover this,

(ii) The umpires shall bring to the notice of the referee, during a break in play, any instances of foul play

Sheridan threw the ball into the net so could they not have told the ref this, during that break in play?

[Turlough O Carolan]

Werent Galway awarded the game officially by the connacht Council as  the ref had disallowed the goal??
Then if I remember correctly Galway agreed to a replay.
Cake Curran  was the man who took the penalty.

Ros were given the cup and did a lap of honor. Since the ref was surrounded by Galway players after the match, at that time he had not disallowed the penalty. Connacht Council then awarded the game to Galway after ref said he had disallowed the goal. Galway offered a replay. You had several precedents in that one.

[muppet]

Werent Galway awarded the game officially by the connacht Council as  the ref had disallowed the goal??
Then if I remember correctly Galway agreed to a replay.
Cake Curran  was the man who took the penalty.

Ros were given the cup and did a lap of honor. Since the ref was surrounded by Galway players after the match, at that time he had not disallowed the penalty. Connacht Council then awarded the game to Galway after ref said he had disallowed the goal. Galway offered a replay. You had several precedents in that one.

I think what happened was that he told both sets of players that it was the last kick of the game. When the ball hit the net the Ros players ran off celebrating which was reasonable enough from their point of view as they didn't know any different. They then were presented with the cup. Meanwhile the Galway players protested with the ref and he confirmed to them that he had disallowed the goal. I met the guys I knew from both teams afterwards and both sides were convinced that they had won. It was a situation even crazier than today's but common sense prevailed even if I suspect Galway's motives were Tony Keady based rather than any sense of integrity.