Club Championships 2025

[Armagh18]

Do you want him to get out a surveyor's wheel?

No but common sense should prevail it was the easier thing for him to do. Get it to extra time or replay and the controversy is less.

The 50m penalty for Sherlocks few minutes earlier was far further.

The common sense thing for him to do is to move it up what he thinks is, give or take, 50m

What we absolutely don't, or shouldn't, want is referees thinking about how the specifics of their decision will influence the choices made by the teams, and then adjusting things on the fly based on preference.

If he'd moved it up massively beyond 50m and well inside the arc there'd be crowds howling about how the Barrs were done in, albeit differently, by a ref that gave a tap over equaliser against them, rather than keeping it outside the arc floor a much more challenging shot.

Yeah thats a good point.

Shitty rule though in that one ref might move it 45m but another could be closer to 55m. Obviously makes a huge difference in difficulty of the kick.

[Smokin Joe]

The foul that the Barrs got moved up 50m for happened on the edge of their 40m arc.
The foul that Dingle got moved up 50m happened halfway between their 45 and 65m line.

Yet the same referee brought both balls up to approximately the same place; just outside the attacking 45m line.  The Dingle free was moved up 10m - 15m less than the Barrs one.  No one needed a trundle wheel to see that.

It looked like the ref was definitely thinking of the context with his final moving the ball forward.

[imtommygunn]

The other thing I don't see mentioned. I thought it was a free to Barrs and not to Dingle.

Each decision should be made autonomously I would say. He should move it forward the same in the 1st second as the last one and the consequences on the outcome of the game should not come into play. At the end of the day the teams themselves are the ones who bring those consequences on themselves.

[Milltown Row2]

Bringing the ball in for a 50m infringement (I'm not talking about this game) the ref can bring it into the 14 if it's 50m from the free/infringement but as it's been carried out, outside the 40m arc the player has the option to shoot from the arc or from the 14.

No free or infringement inside the 40 can be brought out for a two pointer opportunity

This distance shouldn't be too hard though the think in this game that last foul was close to the 40, moving it 50m into a more advantageous area I thought he did. Either way for me it was a foul, though the player wasn't acting the bollox giving the ball back in my view

[Smokin Joe]

No free or infringement inside the 40 can be brought out for a two pointer opportunity

The ref did this yesterday, I think this maybe shows just how much under pressure he was. I hadn't seen it before that, what should have been a 1 point free, ended up as a 2 pointer.

[SouthOfThe Bann]

Do you want him to get out a surveyor's wheel?

No but common sense should prevail it was the easier thing for him to do. Get it to extra time or replay and the controversy is less.

The 50m penalty for Sherlocks few minutes earlier was far further.

The common sense thing for him to do is to move it up what he thinks is, give or take, 50m

What we absolutely don't, or shouldn't, want is referees thinking about how the specifics of their decision will influence the choices made by the teams, and then adjusting things on the fly based on preference.

If he'd moved it up massively beyond 50m and well inside the arc there'd be crowds howling about how the Barrs were done in, albeit differently, by a ref that gave a tap over equaliser against them, rather than keeping it outside the arc floor a much more challenging shot.

Normally I'd agree with you but there was a significant breeze making the kick significantly easier than what it would normally be under normal conditions.

[gallsman]

It looked like the ref was definitely thinking of the context with his final moving the ball forward.

You, nor any of the rest of us, have a clue what he was "definitely thinking".

[Smokin Joe]

It looked like the ref was definitely thinking of the context with his final moving the ball forward.

You, nor any of the rest of us, have a clue what he was "definitely thinking".

True, which is why I included the words "it looked like".  If I knew for certain, those words wouldn't have needed to be included in that sentence.

[Milltown Row2]

No free or infringement inside the 40 can be brought out for a two pointer opportunity

The ref did this yesterday, I think this maybe shows just how much under pressure he was. I hadn't seen it before that, what should have been a 1 point free, ended up as a 2 pointer.

Didn't see that, but we all have seen or been in a position that the rules have not been done correctly or with consistency..

That was always going to be the case this year

[Cunny Funt]

A decent Munster final ended in a bad way. More tweaks on the "rule enhancements" to prevent similar finishes to a game in the future?

Not sure what's going on with the national media with the way they report on matches with very debatable calls (mainly ignored) or why some journalist even having a view if we need some of these rules at all, instead everything seems fine with them and the Irish Examiner for example said it was the most wondrous way to win!

[Milltown Row2]

There are marginal calls or 'mistakes' in the old rules nearly in every game.

This has been more of a thing because of the timing in the game, it being televised and how it won the match

[Cunny Funt]

There are marginal calls or 'mistakes' in the old rules nearly in every game.

This has been more of a thing because of the timing in the game, it being televised and how it won the match

Yes though now since the introduction of all the rule enhancements it appears objective analysis and any constructive criticism of the rules is rarely used by national journalists in their after match reports.

[trileacman]

There are marginal calls or 'mistakes' in the old rules nearly in every game.

This has been more of a thing because of the timing in the game, it being televised and how it won the match

Yeah they were marginal calls and mistakes under the old rules but was there a definite need to add to them with half-baked rules changes?

For all of the errors in the old rules I don't think they ever allowed for a over-carrying free by the attacking team inside the oppositions 45 costing that team 2 points, the match and a Munster title.

The 50m advancement is a bit of joke to be honest. We've seen it all year where teams are punished vastly in excess of the actual infringement. This was just another example of it with a much much more serious outcome.

[Armagh18]

There are marginal calls or 'mistakes' in the old rules nearly in every game.

This has been more of a thing because of the timing in the game, it being televised and how it won the match

Yeah they were marginal calls and mistakes under the old rules but was there a definite need to add to them with half-baked rules changes?

For all of the errors in the old rules I don't think they ever allowed for a over-carrying free by the attacking team inside the oppositions 45 costing that team 2 points, the match and a Munster title.

The 50m advancement is a bit of joke to be honest. We've seen it all year where teams are punished vastly in excess of the actual infringement. This was just another example of it with a much much more serious outcome.

Think its a great rule when utilised properly, but at the minute it's causing more hassle than it's worth.

[Milltown Row2]

Take it up with your clubs, motions need to be put in place so that when the trial is done it can be 'fixed' at county and national conventions

I'm for the 50m advancement so are plenty more, but with regards to the final yesterday, The Barrs had the game won but didn't finish them off.

That two pointer to win it had have been in the second minute there would be much talk about it