More Thuggery on the GAA field

[tyssam5]

But Dromid have the biggest loss to face really. Their manager has a self imposed life ban from all games since he stated he wouldn't go back to any game if Derrytesk were not  kicked out of the competition.

Unless of course he was just talking absolute, complete bollocks and will be back at games in the next few weeks.

Which do you think?

[Hound]

"If" the CCC were judging their punishment by what was shown on that short clip on youtube then its absolutely scandalous.

There were two videos segments on which the bannings were made. Only one has made it to the public.

I'd say its a sure bet that at least two of the Derrytresk bannings arose from the 2nd video.

[Tubberman]

(Northern) Lads, ye were all posting here about Dromid not taking their beating, that they were whinging and making a scene.
Seems fairly hypocritical now when you are all up in arms whinging about the suspensions that have been handed down to Derrytresk. Suck it up.

[Keepthefaith93]

Sure big Fergal will sort the whole think out for you lads.

[tbrick18]

The only thing I'm surprised about in this is that there are 4 derrytresk players suspended....I'm not sure there's evidence for that. Though in saying that, perhaps its for the fracas after the game as opposed to the clip we've all seen. However, the fact that "only" 4 subs are suspended is a let off. IMO any sub that came onto the pitch whether they swung a fist or not should be suspended.
I agree that this type of behaviour needs to be dealt with harshly (as many of the Derry posters will know given my previous posts) but there also has to be an element of fairness to it.
I'd bet that the appeals will be swift and could raise a lot of difficult questions for the powers that be. Fergal Logan doesn't live too far away from Derrytresk and I'd imagine he'll be on the ball.

[Hardy]

Now the appeals industry swings into action. 'Take your medicine and use the time to reflect on how you should behave yourself' seems to be an outdated concept.  The barroom lawyers here pronouncing on the basis of video footage don't seem to remember that the referee's report is the most important evidence.

Bollox.

You don't know what you're talking about.

The referee gives the No.11 a yellow in the brawl. It's now a red.

Fine. You are the expert. Even so, you can't unilaterally re-write the rules of the GAA.

My point, if you would calm down to consider it, is that people here were pronouncing on the sanctions based on a single piece of video on YouTube and, in one or two cases, what they saw themselves if they were present. Nobody was considering the possibility that the referee's report which, notwithstanding the advent of YouTube, is still the primary basis for any disciplinary action, may have contained at least some releveant supplementary information. You can't know whether or not the sanctions applied are correct if you didn't see the evidence on which they were based.

People might have paused for a second to consider that before pronouncing on the fairness or otherwise of the sanctions without access to all the evidence available to the CCCC, including, as pointed out by Hound and AZOffaly, a piece of video that I don't think you've seen.

[tyssam5]

A Pearses spokesperson last night said: "We have received correspondence from Croke Park and we will now be seeking legal advice from Pádraig O'Connell in Killarney. We cannot comment any further at this stage"

Well there's a first!

[AQMP]

Was clipboard man suspended?

Nah, he's free to clip in the final!

[AZOffaly]

Was clipboard man suspended?

Nah, he's free to clip in the final!

Actually I think he was a plant. Poor auld Derrytresk. When I looked at the video blown up, his clip board seems to read 'Eoghan Rua (sp?), Dungannon'.

[AZOffaly]

Now the appeals industry swings into action. 'Take your medicine and use the time to reflect on how you should behave yourself' seems to be an outdated concept.  The barroom lawyers here pronouncing on the basis of video footage don't seem to remember that the referee's report is the most important evidence.

Bollox.

You don't know what you're talking about.

The referee gives the No.11 a yellow in the brawl. It's now a red.

Fine. You are the expert. Even so, you can't unilaterally re-write the rules of the GAA.

My point, if you would calm down to consider it, is that people here were pronouncing on the sanctions based on a single piece of video on YouTube and, in one or two cases, what they saw themselves if they were present. Nobody was considering the possibility that the referee's report which, notwithstanding the advent of YouTube, is still the primary basis for any disciplinary action, may have contained at least some releveant supplementary information. You can't know whether or not the sanctions applied are correct if you didn't see the evidence on which they were based.

People might have paused for a second to consider that before pronouncing on the fairness or otherwise of the sanctions without access to all the evidence available to the CCCC, including, as pointed out by Hound and AZOffaly, a piece of video that I don't think you've seen.

That's what I was hinting at Hardy alright. I've heard of at least one suspension handed down for scenes not on that video, so I'm sure there's other incidents not directly part of the row that showed up in the other incidents, either during or after the match.

[ziggysego]

(Northern) Lads, ye were all posting here about Dromid not taking their beating, that they were whinging and making a scene.
Seems fairly hypocritical now when you are all up in arms whinging about the suspensions that have been handed down to Derrytresk. Suck it up.

(Southern) lad, Dromid man, Jack O'Connor, said that Cork should quit crying and take their beating back in 2009. This, despite Tadhg Kennelly's disgraceful attack at the start of the game.

One rule for Dromid and Kerry, and a different rule for everyone else.

[sawel]

I was at the game, and i expected a heavy suspension especially after the Monday radio shows, although i think the pinishment is a little lop sided for each club.
I'ii not dwell on the players suspension, but how they could pick out only 4 subs for suspension and no mentors baffles me.
In all counties the further down the pile u r, u generally get a heaver suspension and so its the case here.
I think the token suspensions and fines that were handed out for the league final in Tyrone were far too light and its having a bearing on this case.
As in most cases an appeal will lift gain some lee-way and i feel that a player or too will get off, but due to the profile there shall be no major shift.
I was always of the opinion that Derrytresk would not be thrown out, regardless of how much Kery shouted, but that Croke Park would leave it extremely difficult for them to won the final

[screenexile]

Fcuk me ye Tyrone lads need to stop crying!!! Bottom line is you can't empty the sub bench for an incident that amounted to no more than handbags . . . by rights Derrytresk should be thrown out and probably would be were it any other sport.

The fact the GAA Disciplinary system is a joke means there is all this appealing and nonsense about "awww they can't miss their big day out in Croke Park". It means fcuk all!! If you break the rules you deserve to get punished!!

[lynchbhoy]

I was at the game, and i expected a heavy suspension especially after the Monday radio shows, although i think the pinishment is a little lop sided for each club.
I'ii not dwell on the players suspension, but how they could pick out only 4 subs for suspension and no mentors baffles me.
In all counties the further down the pile u r, u generally get a heaver suspension and so its the case here.
I think the token suspensions and fines that were handed out for the league final in Tyrone were far too light and its having a bearing on this case.
As in most cases an appeal will lift gain some lee-way and i feel that a player or too will get off, but due to the profile there shall be no major shift.
I was always of the opinion that Derrytresk would not be thrown out, regardless of how much Kery shouted, but that Croke Park would leave it extremely difficult for them to won the final

agree with above.
Surprised that so many derrytreask players received suspensions. The subs 'contributed to a melee' more so thought they would bear the brunt. I'd have expected more dromid players to be suspended than derrytreask.

As for those of you asking about any violence after the game - well apart from the handbag swing at Declan osullivan by that female (?) supporter there was none.Certianly none that I saw. Goadng yes but nothing worthy of a yellow card let alone red or suspension.

[AZOffaly]

I was at the game, and i expected a heavy suspension especially after the Monday radio shows, although i think the pinishment is a little lop sided for each club.
I'ii not dwell on the players suspension, but how they could pick out only 4 subs for suspension and no mentors baffles me.
In all counties the further down the pile u r, u generally get a heaver suspension and so its the case here.
I think the token suspensions and fines that were handed out for the league final in Tyrone were far too light and its having a bearing on this case.
As in most cases an appeal will lift gain some lee-way and i feel that a player or too will get off, but due to the profile there shall be no major shift.
I was always of the opinion that Derrytresk would not be thrown out, regardless of how much Kery shouted, but that Croke Park would leave it extremely difficult for them to won the final

agree with above.
Surprised that so many derrytreask players received suspensions. The subs 'contributed to a melee' more so thought they would bear the brunt. I'd have expected more dromid players to be suspended than derrytreask.

As for those of you asking about any violence after the game - well apart from the handbag swing at Declan osullivan by that female (?) supporter there was none.Certianly none that I saw. Goadng yes but nothing worthy of a yellow card let alone red or suspension.

More Dromid players? In the name of God, why would you say that? Or do you mean more Dromid starters? Quite apart from the other incidents, I thought #11 and #15 deserved a ban, so I'd have had it at 2-2 on the players front, and about 6 subs.

And as mentioned, this does not account for the post match or any other incidents.