Tyrone V Monaghan AIQF 2015

[Hardy]

And the answer might be "why not?"

If Joe Brolly wants to pretend that the legal system informs the GAA disciplinary procedure he'd need to be consistent and remember the principle that the fact that one person gets away with a crime doesn't mean everyone else must be forgiven the same crime; or that all instances of the same crime must incur the same sentence.

But that's only to attempt to debunk Joe's claims. I agree with you that consistency and fairness are important (though ultimately impossible in the absolute). In this case, though, as I've argued elsewhere, I'll live with a little unfairness in the interest of an effective strike against play-acting. And to be honest I won't lose too much sleep over unfairness in this particular case. Anyone who carries on like that doesn't have much grounds to be demanding fairness.

[trueblue1234]

And the answer might be "why not?"

If Joe Brolly wants to pretend that the legal system informs the GAA disciplinary procedure he'd need to be consistent and remember the principle that the fact that one person gets away with a crime doesn't mean everyone else must be forgiven the same crime; or that all instances of the same crime must incur the same sentence.

But that's only to attempt to debunk Joe's claims. I agree with you that consistency and fairness are important (though ultimately impossible in the absolute). In this case, though, as I've argued elsewhere, I'll live with a little unfairness in the interest of an effective strike against play-acting. And to be honest I won't lose too much sleep over unfairness in this particular case. Anyone who carries on like that doesn't have much grounds to be demanding fairness.

Thats one view. However i could never be as accepting of a sporting organisation acting unfairly. In fact it calls the reputation of the organisation into question. That for me would be an even bigger worry than a player taking a dive for me.

[muppet]

And the answer might be "why not?"

If Joe Brolly wants to pretend that the legal system informs the GAA disciplinary procedure he'd need to be consistent and remember the principle that the fact that one person gets away with a crime doesn't mean everyone else must be forgiven the same crime; or that all instances of the same crime must incur the same sentence.

But that's only to attempt to debunk Joe's claims. I agree with you that consistency and fairness are important (though ultimately impossible in the absolute). In this case, though, as I've argued elsewhere, I'll live with a little unfairness in the interest of an effective strike against play-acting. And to be honest I won't lose too much sleep over unfairness in this particular case. Anyone who carries on like that doesn't have much grounds to be demanding fairness.

That is fair enough in the context of the GAA. But I bet the courts won't see it that way.

[Hardy]

You're not suggesting it will go to court?

[muppet]

You're not suggesting it will go to court?

They did it before.

Is a DRA finding binding?

[imtommygunn]

Was there not a court case over mcmenamin that was won in 2005 i think? The one where he got done on video for the knee incident.

[Hardy]

You're not suggesting it will go to court?

They did it before.

Is a DRA finding binding?

It is in the sense that that's what everybody signed up to. But everyone can go to court, though I don't think anyone has had the brass neck to do so since the DRA was instituted. I can't imagine Tyrone would squander the respect and esteem in which they're held by the rest of us.

[Hardy]

Wasn't McMenamin post DRA? In fact, wasn't it one of the cases that led to the redrafting of the disciplinary system?

[Gabriel_Hurl]

Make it a black card offence with the caveat that a retrospective ban could follow

[Hardy]

Why can't we have an effective strike against play acting by saying that from now on it will be a 2 month ban, without banning McCann? Change the rules, everyone has been warned.

We could. But that would mean McCann got away with it. I know others have got away with it. But being fair to McCann (who didn't give a shite about fairness to the game or his opponent) isn't that high on my list of priorities.

It's not the end of the world that the association says that's it. Enough of this shite. Here's an eight week ban. Now, who's next for a dive? It's unorthodox, but likely to be more effective, not least because all of Irish sport is talking about and any cheating little bollix who might have taken a belly flop this weekend might just think again.

[Hardy]

I meant to say, it's only unfair in the sense that others who did similar stunts (though not QUITE as bad) didn't get the same punishment. It's not unfair in any legal sense, so fire away, I say to the CCCC. We either want to stop this crap or we don't.

[rrhf]

I just wish Joe Sheridan had shared your honourable values. 

[Hardy]

I just wish Joe Sheridan had shared your honourable values. 

More. misdirection. Whatabout, look at ... it's somebody else's fault.

The relevant point here is that Joe did nothing wrong.

[trueblue1234]

I meant to say, it's only unfair in the sense that others who did similar stunts (though not QUITE as bad) didn't get the same punishment. It's not unfair in any legal sense, so fire away, I say to the CCCC. We either want to stop this crap or we don't.

But that's ignoring why others were allowed to get away with it and this case wasn't. If there's bias in selecting which cases to review, then that's a serious issue as well and calls the organisation into question.

[Hardy]

He got away with it because it was only covered by a yellow card in our rules at the time of the offence. That is the same reason why others were let away with it in the past.

It is unfair in that the rule book (the day he played that match) states that doing such would be a yellow card, yet he was given a totally different punishment.

More than one rule covers what he did. The rule book also states that discrediting the association carries a minimum penalty of eight weeks' suspension. Does anyone mintain that McCann's carry-on didn't discredit the association? (You wouldn't doubt it if you had to listed to soccer and rugby heads around here.)

So there's no huge violation of human rights here. And that's  by no means a 'bizarre' position. You could call it bizarre if it was alone-in-a thousand opinion. I'd say a few dozen on this board alone agree that if this works, it will be a good day's work.