Donegal on slippery slope?

[ballinaman]

3 games very soft IMO.

3 month ban effectively. You should probably wait for the full report before making your mind up too.

True, don't think it's cut and dried yet (pardon the pun!)

[orangeman]

Does the proposed ban mean they'll now name and summon the player to answer the case?

No, it means they've sent a proposed ban to the DCB, the player now has the option to accept the proposed ban or seek a hearing. He's choosing the latter.

I would imagine there would not be a proposed ban unless there was concrete evidence. Also cant understand why he has not been named yet publically when the dogs on the street know who done it.

Don't forget in a very, very hgh profile incident in Ulster a few months ago, a player received a proposed suspension and the evidence was supposed to be concrete, but the player was completely exhonerated.

So we should await the outcome here as well.

[Croí na hÉireann]

Didn't stop the Times naming him today - http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/gaelic-games/gaelic-football/dublin-footballer-kevin-o-brien-to-contest-ban-for-alleged-biting-incident-1.1363589

Not the name I heard last week. Is the Times turning into the Indo?

[johnneycool]

Does the proposed ban mean they'll now name and summon the player to answer the case?

Would the CCCC recommend the 3 game ban based on the referee's report only or was there direct input from both the Donegal and Dublin camps and players involved already?

[Ohtoohtobe]

Whether O'Brien bit McBrearty or not, I'm getting really sick of this 'dark arts' bollix. Seems like almost every inter-county team is shaming themselves with sneaky, vicious stuff and disgusting verbal abuse about girlfriends, dead relatives, whatever.

The game was designed to be played with bravery and honour. It seems anything can be justified if you win, and people talk about it as if using the 'dark arts' shows how clever and determined you are. In fact if I was running a paper I'd ban the term 'dark arts' and replace it with what it is: cowardice.

[J70]

There must have been pretty conclusive proof that it was a bite, no a bruise or a graze. How do they prove O'Brien did it though? Were there witnesses?

[yellowcard]

If he bit, as appears likely then he deserves a ban. Neither side comes out of this well however. The Dublin player for the alleged bite and the Donegal team for crying to the media. Dozens of incidents take place on the field of play but its a sort of unwritten rule that what happens on the field stays on the field. If McBrearty had suffered a bad injury I could undestand it.

[J70]

If he bit, as appears likely then he deserves a ban. Neither side comes out of this well however. The Dublin player for the alleged bite and the Donegal team for crying to the media. Dozens of incidents take place on the field of play but its a sort of unwritten rule that what happens on the field stays on the field. If McBrearty had suffered a bad injury I could undestand it.

Biting is a routine occurrence on the GAA field?

Did Donegal go to the media? Or was it leaked? How do you keep something like this quiet in the days of twitter and facebook etc.?

[haranguerer]

Wtf? A 3 match 'proposed' ban for an 'unnamed player' for biting? That's a disgrace, it should e 3 months. Whatever about hitting someone in a row, biting someone is a different level.

And what a loada bollocks saying dgal come out of it badly. Some tr**p bit one of their players, if they're not gonna try to see the right thing done who is? If it wasn't dublin involved the furore would be greater, and Donegal were pretty tight lipped, more than they should have been, about the affair

[Hound]

Wtf? A 3 match 'proposed' ban for an 'unnamed player' for biting? That's a disgrace, it should e 3 months. Whatever about hitting someone in a row, biting someone is a different level.

3 match ban would be at least 2 months and up to 3 months in this case.

[yellowcard]

If he bit, as appears likely then he deserves a ban. Neither side comes out of this well however. The Dublin player for the alleged bite and the Donegal team for crying to the media. Dozens of incidents take place on the field of play but its a sort of unwritten rule that what happens on the field stays on the field. If McBrearty had suffered a bad injury I could undestand it.

Biting is a routine occurrence on the GAA field?

Did Donegal go to the media? Or was it leaked? How do you keep something like this quiet in the days of twitter and facebook etc.?

Well you know more about it than I do, if Donegal didnt go to the media then I stand corrected and maybe I'm being slightly unfair on Donegal here.

If McBrearty suffered a bad injury then the Dublin player deserves whatever he gets. However when you compare this case to the Paul O'Connell one from last weekend and consider the respective punishments there is definitely serious double standards in applying disciplinary judgement between GAA and rugby. Kearney was hospitalised by a kick in the head by O'Connell who gets off scot free despite video evidence and here a Dublin player gets a 3 match ban despite, to the best of my knowledge, no evidence.

[johnneycool]

If he bit, as appears likely then he deserves a ban. Neither side comes out of this well however. The Dublin player for the alleged bite and the Donegal team for crying to the media. Dozens of incidents take place on the field of play but its a sort of unwritten rule that what happens on the field stays on the field. If McBrearty had suffered a bad injury I could undestand it.

Biting is a routine occurrence on the GAA field?

Did Donegal go to the media? Or was it leaked? How do you keep something like this quiet in the days of twitter and facebook etc.?

Well you know more about it than I do, if Donegal didnt go to the media then I stand corrected and maybe I'm being slightly unfair on Donegal here.

If McBrearty suffered a bad injury then the Dublin player deserves whatever he gets. However when you compare this case to the Paul O'Connell one from last weekend and consider the respective punishments there is definitely serious double standards in applying disciplinary judgement between GAA and rugby. Kearney was hospitalised by a kick in the head by O'Connell who gets off scot free despite video evidence and here a Dublin player gets a 3 match ban despite, to the best of my knowledge, no evidence.

O'Connell could also have pummeled someone with a good tackle which would warrant a red or black card in football but great stuff in rugby. If he'd shoulder charged someone he'd have got sin binned or more at rugby but fair play in Football!!!

Two different games with different sets of rules, so hardly double standards.

[J70]

If he bit, as appears likely then he deserves a ban. Neither side comes out of this well however. The Dublin player for the alleged bite and the Donegal team for crying to the media. Dozens of incidents take place on the field of play but its a sort of unwritten rule that what happens on the field stays on the field. If McBrearty had suffered a bad injury I could undestand it.

Biting is a routine occurrence on the GAA field?

Did Donegal go to the media? Or was it leaked? How do you keep something like this quiet in the days of twitter and facebook etc.?

Well you know more about it than I do, if Donegal didnt go to the media then I stand corrected and maybe I'm being slightly unfair on Donegal here.

If McBrearty suffered a bad injury then the Dublin player deserves whatever he gets. However when you compare this case to the Paul O'Connell one from last weekend and consider the respective punishments there is definitely serious double standards in applying disciplinary judgement between GAA and rugby. Kearney was hospitalised by a kick in the head by O'Connell who gets off scot free despite video evidence and here a Dublin player gets a 3 match ban despite, to the best of my knowledge, no evidence.

I honestly don't know how it came out. McGuinness didn't say anything about it, beyond a vague reference to some untoward behaviour on the pitch. Donegal officials did comment that the referee had been informed, but I've no idea if that was how it first hit the papers. All it takes is a player or backroom member or hospital employee to say it to one of his mates and next thing its on the internet and then the media. But regardless, does it matter? The issue is the alleged bite, not the revelation.

Beyond that, the photos and medical report must have clearly shown a bite, otherwise they'd hardly be recommending a ban, would they? Or maybe I'm overestimating the abilities of the CCCC.

[yellowcard]

If he bit, as appears likely then he deserves a ban. Neither side comes out of this well however. The Dublin player for the alleged bite and the Donegal team for crying to the media. Dozens of incidents take place on the field of play but its a sort of unwritten rule that what happens on the field stays on the field. If McBrearty had suffered a bad injury I could undestand it.

Biting is a routine occurrence on the GAA field?

Did Donegal go to the media? Or was it leaked? How do you keep something like this quiet in the days of twitter and facebook etc.?

Well you know more about it than I do, if Donegal didnt go to the media then I stand corrected and maybe I'm being slightly unfair on Donegal here.

If McBrearty suffered a bad injury then the Dublin player deserves whatever he gets. However when you compare this case to the Paul O'Connell one from last weekend and consider the respective punishments there is definitely serious double standards in applying disciplinary judgement between GAA and rugby. Kearney was hospitalised by a kick in the head by O'Connell who gets off scot free despite video evidence and here a Dublin player gets a 3 match ban despite, to the best of my knowledge, no evidence.

O'Connell could also have pummeled someone with a good tackle which would warrant a red or black card in football but great stuff in rugby. If he'd shoulder charged someone he'd have got sin binned or more at rugby but fair play in Football!!!

Two different games with different sets of rules, so hardly double standards.

But we aren't talking about a pummelling or a shoulder charge.

A kick in the head that hospitalised an opponent should warrant punishment no matter the code.

The biggest issue is that due to the tribal nature of the GAA, many media pundits claim moral outrage depending on who or which county committed the crime. The level of outrage usually depends on who and from which county the player who committed the crime is from. It provokes media debate which is exactly what the very people who instigate these reports want in the first place, it keeps them in the forefront of the media.

[johnneycool]

If he bit, as appears likely then he deserves a ban. Neither side comes out of this well however. The Dublin player for the alleged bite and the Donegal team for crying to the media. Dozens of incidents take place on the field of play but its a sort of unwritten rule that what happens on the field stays on the field. If McBrearty had suffered a bad injury I could undestand it.

Biting is a routine occurrence on the GAA field?

Did Donegal go to the media? Or was it leaked? How do you keep something like this quiet in the days of twitter and facebook etc.?

Well you know more about it than I do, if Donegal didnt go to the media then I stand corrected and maybe I'm being slightly unfair on Donegal here.

If McBrearty suffered a bad injury then the Dublin player deserves whatever he gets. However when you compare this case to the Paul O'Connell one from last weekend and consider the respective punishments there is definitely serious double standards in applying disciplinary judgement between GAA and rugby. Kearney was hospitalised by a kick in the head by O'Connell who gets off scot free despite video evidence and here a Dublin player gets a 3 match ban despite, to the best of my knowledge, no evidence.

O'Connell could also have pummeled someone with a good tackle which would warrant a red or black card in football but great stuff in rugby. If he'd shoulder charged someone he'd have got sin binned or more at rugby but fair play in Football!!!

Two different games with different sets of rules, so hardly double standards.

But we aren't talking about a pummelling or a shoulder charge.

A kick in the head that hospitalised an opponent should warrant punishment no matter the code.

The biggest issue is that due to the tribal nature of the GAA, many media pundits claim moral outrage depending on who or which county committed the crime. The level of outrage usually depends on who and from which county the player who committed the crime is from. It provokes media debate which is exactly what the very people who instigate these reports want in the first place, it keeps them in the forefront of the media.

I think a kick in the head is ok in MMA, can't be sure.

Different rules for different codes, why bring something that happened in rugby into it?

Your points about selective indignation depending on the offending county are very real though.