Is this the worst rule in all of sport?

KevIRL

Players sent off in normal time can be replaced if the game goes to extra team, allowing their team to have a full complement of 15 players again.

Absolute idiocy GAA.

barney 20v

YES.... totally unfair .... but sure hey... its the gaa..

Minstrel27

That is absolute horse ****. Can the team with no sendings off replace tired players without using substitutions?

bazza1

Surely red cards are a punishment? Not in Ireland! Its the same with suspensions. Banned for weeks when there are no games instead of a number of games.

eigrod

Minstrel27 wrote: »

That is absolute horse ****. Can the team with no sendings off replace tired players without using substitutions?

Yes. The Extra Time is effectively a new game. You start with a 15 of the manager's choice (except for the players sent off) and are allowed 3 substitutions during the Extra Time then.

Minstrel27

Absolutely mnd boggling.

eigrod

Minstrel27 wrote: »

Absolutely mnd boggling.

Not really. If it went straight to a replay, then the exact same conditions apply.

congress3

Seems a bit idiotic

Jigga

Whatever retard introduced it should be shot. It's the same contest ffs! Absolutely no deterrent for a player not to kick the sh!t out of another just before full time as he knows there will be no penalty for his team. One has to wonder what absolute imbeciles run GAA.

keane2097

eigrod wrote: »

Yes. The Extra Time is effectively a new game. You start with a 15 of the manager's choice (except for the players sent off) and are allowed 3 substitutions during the Extra Time then.

If it's a new game a player who was sent off for two yellow cards should be allowed to play.

Anyone watching the impact Bryan Cullen and Tomás Quin have had on the extra time of the Dublin Wexford game will see how ridiculous this rule is.

OAOB

I've no problem with the rule, its consistent at least which isn't something we can say about a lot of the GAA rules

eigrod

keane2097 wrote: »

Anyone watching the impact Bryan Cullen and Tomás Quin have had on the extra time of the Dublin Wexford game will see how ridiculous this rule is.

Or alternatively, anyone watching Wexford chuck away a huge lead against 14, and then 13, men, will see how they didn't deserve to win the game anyway.

keane2097

eigrod wrote: »

Or alternatively, anyone watching Wexford chuck away a huge lead against 14, and then 13, men, will see how they didn't deserve to win the game anyway.

Six points is hardly a huge lead, but anyway.

They were level at full time against a team who had clearly used some serious foul play to get into that position, hence the two red cards.

I have no doubt if they were playing against 13 men in extra time they'd be progressing.

It's ridiculous.

KevIRL

urrrrgh, I'm not talking specifically about the Dublin-Wexford game but the rule in general. Same thing happened in the Cork-Kerry game today.

eigrod

KevIRL wrote: »

urrrrgh, I'm not talking specifically about the Dublin-Wexford game but the rule in general. Same thing happened in the Cork-Kerry game today.

It's been this way for at least 30 years in the GAA.

Columbia

Last minute of stoppage time, a man from team A is clear in on goal with the two sides level.

Defender from team B hacks him down and is automatically sent off. Apart from the formality of the re-start this is the last action of normal time.

Extra time starts with team B back to 15 men, and not having had to play any length of time with reduced numbers.

Fair?

(I know team A would likely be given a free-kick in a scoring position, so it's not a great example, but the point does stand)

Minstrel27

eigrod wrote: »

Not really. If it went straight to a replay, then the exact same conditions apply.

If it is effectively a new game then why don't they play for a further 70 minutes?

Quazzie

eigrod wrote: »

Or alternatively, anyone watching Wexford chuck away a huge lead against 14, and then 13, men, will see how they didn't deserve to win the game anyway.

Please tell me you're not being serious.

Dublin had two lads sent off correctly but still have 15 men on the field in the same game. How can anyone defend that.

KevIRL

eigrod wrote: »

It's been this way for at least 30 years in the GAA.

I'm aware of this. The fact that a rule has been in place for a long time does not make it a correct or indeed fair rule.

eigrod

Quazzie wrote: »

Please tell me you're not being serious.

Dublin had two lads sent off correctly but still have 15 men on the field in the same game. How can anyone defend that.

Deadly serious. It's the way it's always been. It's not the 'same game', that's the point. Extra Time constitutes a new game under GAA rules. I assume this was introduced originally because Extra Time was to replace a replay. If it went to a replay after normal time today, then Dublin would have 15 starters in the replay.

As pointed out above, the era of 2 yellows not constituting a ban has changed things a little and perhaps that needs to be looked at.

Both teams know the rules going into games where ET is a possibility.

If people don't like it, then perhaps they should exercise their democratic right and go down their local club and propose it as a rule change that should be brought to their County Convention and to Congress subsequently.

Quazzie

eigrod wrote: »

Deadly serious. It's the way it's always been. It's not the 'same game', that's the point. Extra Time constitutes a new game under GAA rules. I assume this was introduced originally because Extra Time was to replace a replay. If it went to a replay after normal time today, then Dublin would have 15 starters in the replay.

As pointed out above, the era of 2 yellows not constituting a ban has changed things a little and perhaps that needs to be looked at.

Both teams know the rules going into games where ET is a possibility.

If people don't like it, then perhaps they should exercise their democratic right and go down their local club and propose it as a rule change that should be brought to their County Convention and to Congress subsequently.

well if it's a new game we really should let the GAA know they should be charging everyone again for the second game of the day. Calling it a 'new game' is a lame attempt at defending it. It's a **** rule that shows how stupid and backward the sport is at times.

eigrod

Quazzie wrote: »

well if it's a new game we really should let the GAA know they should be charging everyone again for the second game of the day. Calling it a 'new game' is a lame attempt at defending it. It's a **** rule that shows how stupid and backward the sport is at times.

Perhaps. Then again, no player, manager or administrator thought it worthy to push strongly enough to change the rule over the last 30 odd years.

keane2097

eigrod wrote: »

Perhaps. Then again, no player, manager or administrator thought it worthy to push strongly enough to change the rule over the last 30 odd years.

So what?

If that's the best defense that can be put forth for a rule then it's a fair shout that it must be pretty bad.

TouchingVirus

I think it's a stupid rule to be honest, even though the dubs benefitted from it today.

It's a 'new game' yet the team who didn't get anybody sent off has 15 knackered players while the other team has fresh legs. It's not like a replay, where all the teams have fresh legs. It isn't the same and it's a backwards rule.

km79

i witnessed a club county final couple of years back . team A had 2 men sent off and as the rule states for extra time they were back to 15. HOWEVER team B had their captain sent off for picking up a yellow in extra time along with yellow picked up in normal time !!!!! now that was an idiotic rule new game for reds but not yellows!!!! i think this aspect of it has benn amended though?

TouchingVirus

keane2097 wrote: »

So what?

If that's the best defense that can be put forth for a rule then it's a fair shout that it must be pretty bad.

No, the theory is if it's as bad as we're sayin it is somebody would have mounted a challenge.

I think the assumption is incorrect myself, and represents a flawed logic.

keane2097

It's actually an advantage to have had players sent off late on if you can still manage to make it to extra time, as you can replace extra tired legs with extra fresh legs compared to the team who haven't had anyone sent off.

Crazy, crazy rule.

keane2097

TouchingVirus wrote: »

No, the theory is if it's as bad as we're sayin it is somebody would have mounted a challenge.

I think the assumption is incorrect myself, and represents a flawed logic.

ldo

mattock

Jigga wrote: »

Whatever retard introduced it should be shot. It's the same contest ffs! Absolutely no deterrent for a player not to kick the sh!t out of another just before full time as he knows there will be no penalty for his team. One has to wonder what absolute imbeciles run GAA.

We do,

Well us that are members of clubs, that is the great thing about the GAA we are an association and every club/county are eligible to forward motions to congress to have the rules changed.

eigrod

mattock wrote: »

We do,

Well us that are members of clubs, that is the great thing about the GAA we are an association and every club/county are eligible to forward motions to congress to have the rules changed.

Exactly.

eigrod

km79 wrote: »

i witnessed a club county final couple of years back . team A had 2 men sent off and as the rule states for extra time they were back to 15. HOWEVER team B had their captain sent off for picking up a yellow in extra time along with yellow picked up in normal time !!!!! now that was an idiotic rule new game for reds but not yellows!!!! i think this aspect of it has benn amended though?

That, as touched on earlier, should certainly be looked at, if it hasn't been already.

And as for those criticising the GAA for "idiotic rules", then FIFA/UEFA are not immune either. If a Champions League game goes to Extra Time in the 2nd leg and if both teams score 1 goal each, the away team still get the benefit of an away goal victory even though they have had an extra 30 minutes of an 'away' game to get it then their opponents. That's far more idiotic, imo.

keane2097

eigrod wrote: »

That, as touched on earlier, should certainly be looked at, if it hasn't been already.

And as for those criticising the GAA for "idiotic rules", then FIFA/UEFA are not immune either. If a Champions League game goes to Extra Time in the 2nd leg and if both teams score 1 goal each, the away team still get the benefit of an away goal victory even though they have had an extra 30 minutes of an 'away' game to get it then their opponents. That's far more idiotic, imo.

The idea is this is balanced by the advantage the home team get by playing an extra 30 minutes at home.

rpurfield

to be honest i can only remember being at two games in nearly twenty years of going to games where ive seen this rule come into play and today was the second one.its a rare enough occurance imo

eigrod

rpurfield wrote: »

to be honest i can only remember being at two games in nearly twenty years of going to games where ive seen this rule come into play and today was the second one.its a rare enough occurance imo

Ironically, it happened in 2 games today.

I suppose it's going to happen more often since the 2 yellow card rule came into play as more players are being sent off.

eigrod

keane2097 wrote: »

The idea is this is balanced by the advantage the home team get by playing an extra 30 minutes at home.

Please don't present counter arguments to my points with sensible points. I don't like it.

keane2097

It's just that I'm trying to figure out if there's a similar "balancing out" inherent in this GAA rule.

I don't really think there is...

unknown13

TBH the GAA are making the rules of football worse. They should abolished the pick up rule and the new hand pass rule because it will make the games more faster.

Lando Griffin

The GAA are ruining the game of football. The amount of stoppages to book players and tend to injured players is crazy for a 35 minute half. That rule replacing the man sent off is totally stupid.

mattock

unknown13 wrote: »

TBH the GAA are making the rules of football worse. They should abolished the pick up rule and the new hand pass rule because it will make the games more faster.

Totally disagree, the pick up with the boot is a great skill, what should be done is referees should blow up the doubtful pick ups and then everyone would be back to getting there toe under the ball properly.
Look at the hand pass now, once players realised that they were going to be penalised for not getting it right they soon copped on to the rule, how many dodgy hand passes were there today.

Its like the line ball the rule was always there that you could not cross the line but it was never enforced, but now it is and the players know what the penalty is.

homerjay2005

the rules are there for everybody and have been there for years. we had a freak day today where we had 3 games go to extra time and 2 of them had red cards. people are only jumping on the "its an outrage" bandwagon as it was a part in 2 games.

funny enough, people dont seem to mention how the "new game" rule also allows 3 subs to be brought on......that has benifits to both teams and also reduces the risk of a player getting injured in the extra 20 and 5 subs quota has already been passed.

little bit of relaxation folks, its not often it arises as we dont see it that much, today was just a freak day. it wont have happened that much before in big games.

keane2097

homerjay2005 wrote: »

the rules are there for everybody and have been there for years. we had a freak day today where we had 3 games go to extra time and 2 of them had red cards. people are only jumping on the "its an outrage" bandwagon as it was a part in 2 games.

funny enough, people dont seem to mention how the "new game" rule also allows 3 subs to be brought on......that has benifits to both teams and also reduces the risk of a player getting injured in the extra 20 and 5 subs quota has already been passed.

little bit of relaxation folks, its not often it arises as we dont see it that much, today was just a freak day. it wont have happened that much before in big games.

The fact that it's a rare occurance doesn't stop it being a stupid rule.

And obv people are going to call it into question when there are big games affected by it, that doesn't diminish the argument whatsoever.

There's no doubt that this current rule gives an advantage to teams that have had men sent off, therefore it obviously needs to be changed.

allthedoyles

eigrod wrote: »

It's been this way for at least 30 years in the GAA.

Allowing 15 men in extra time cannot be justified .......

Maybe my memory is short , but how long have the GAA been playing extra time after the 1st match.

My memory of GAA in the 90's was this :

• First game ended after 70 minutes
• Replayed and if the game ended level , then extra time was played

Correct me if I am wrong

yahoo_moe

Jigga wrote: »

It's the same contest ffs!

So do you think a team that ends a drawn match with 14 men should start a replay with 14 men as well?

allthedoyles wrote: »

how long have the GAA been playing extra time after the 1st match.

You're missing the point. Extra time is being brought in more to prevent player burnout and fixture congestion - it's taking the place of replays and the GAA counts anything after the 70 minutes as a new match. It doesn't matter whether or not some games would've gone to replays that no don't.

keane2097 wrote: »

It's actually an advantage to have had players sent off late on if you can still manage to make it to extra time

Even if you're right, that's a massive 'if'. It's never an advantage to be a player or two down, for any length of time.

Lot of hysteria in here imo with people caning the rule without thinking about it/discussing the actual reasoning behind it.

keane2097

yahoo_moe wrote: »

Even if you're right, that's a massive 'if'. It's never an advantage to be a player or two down, for any length of time.

I am right obv.

If a team have two players sent off and make it to extra time they get to introduce five fresh players compared to the team who got nobody sent off only being able to introduce three fresh players.

This is a clear advantage to the team that has had players sent off.

yahoo_moe

Not necessarily though - fresher players can also be the ones who aren't up to the pace of the game (and aren't your best players anyway) so it's far from definite.

But I'm not gonna get too into that part of it as I'd mainly disagree with your original point because of the 'if they make it to extra time' proviso.

Plus neither of them really address the issue of the rule being there because extra time is considered to be replacing a replay.

keane2097

yahoo_moe wrote: »

Not necessarily though - fresher players can also be the ones who aren't up to the pace of the game (and aren't your best players anyway) so it's far from definite.

Fine, it's just an extremely strong possibility that the team with players sent off gain an advantage.

yahoo_moe wrote: »

But I'm not gonna get too into that part of it as I'd mainly disagree with your original point because of the 'if they make it to extra time' proviso.

What on earth do you mean?

This can only possibly become an issue if the team with players sent off make it to extra time.

yahoo_moe wrote: »

Plus neither of them really address the issue of the rule being there because extra time is considered to be replacing a replay.

If it's a new game a player who's had two yellow cards in ordinary time should be able to play again, no extra subs should be allowed and no yellow cards picked up in normal time should count any more.

Clearly it's not a simple case of "it's a new game".

Minstrel27

yahoo_moe wrote: »

So do you think a team that ends a drawn match with 14 men should start a replay with 14 men as well?

It is the same game. This whole new contest arguement is rubbish.

StPatsFc

I am in no way condoning this rule at all and in fact the 2 Dublin players were correctly sent off. But it seems that it’s an anti Dublin thing again. I’m sure this has happened on numerous occasions before and went un-noticed but because it’s DUBLIN there’s a big hula-bulla

magicface1

Its a funny rule alright but it has been in the GAA for years... I think it should be updated

Quazzie

Maybe there is a genuine answer here but why did Cork v Kerry go to replay but Dublin v Wexford go to Extra Time?

Speak Now

Love this thread Rule has been like this for years but now that those nasty Dubs have benifited i think it should be changed immediately
Seriously though if the GAA's argument is that it's a new game then at least set the score board back to zero for each side :P