A few GAA referee conundrums

Pinesky

I agree the ref didnt have the best of games but unintentionally it contributed to a classic .
I fear all the complaining will lead to a whistlefest in the final .

realweirdo

Pinesky wrote: »

I agree the ref didnt have the best of games but unintentionally it contributed to a classic .
I fear all the complaining will lead to a whistlefest in the final .

No-one wants a whistlefest. They want a strong referee who lays the law down early and most of all consistancy. Lee Keegan got sent off for nothing last week, this week players on both sides were guilty of far worse. In other words the law was applied one week but not the next. Both games were good up to a point but in extra time it was out of control. Another thing, what happened to the rule on tackling with the closed fist? I vaguely remember such a rule when i was playing. The rule seems to have been forgotten. Punches aimed at players carrying the ball and no protection for the player.

TopOfTheRight

Here's one - Mayo's second last free-in on Saturday;
Cillian O'Connor takes a free from the 13 metre line and blasts it low, it is stopped by a Kerryman inside the small rectangle but about 3 metres out from the goalline (placing him 10-11 metres from the ball when it was struck).
This kind of thing is very common as you will often see players standing around the square in front of the goalline for a free in, but a penalty should be awarded here as defenders must be 13 metres from the ball when it is struck.
I've never seen it given though and you'd nearly have to have a word in the referee's ear and say 'I'm going to strike this at that defender there who's too close to the ball and you may award me a penalty, right?'

BonnieSituation

TopOfTheRight wrote: »

Here's one - Mayo's second last free-in on Saturday;
Cillian O'Connor takes a free from the 13 metre line and blasts it low, it is stopped by a Kerryman inside the small rectangle but about 3 metres out from the goalline (placing him 10-11 metres from the ball when it was struck).
This kind of thing is very common as you will often see players standing around the square in front of the goalline for a free in, but a penalty should be awarded here as defenders must be 13 metres from the ball when it is struck.
I've never seen it given though and you'd nearly have to have a word in the referee's ear and say 'I'm going to strike this at that defender there who's too close to the ball and you may award me a penalty, right?'

That would have been some call for Reilly to give considering some of the stuff he missed. Then again if he did would we be surprised?

Boshea77

daniels.ducks wrote: »

If this happened on the sideline the free would have to be taken on the field. I'd award a penalty. I'd say the foul happened on the field in that case. Asked an assessor there a while back and he wasn't sure.

Something like this is very much down to the interpretation of the ref. I would say that the player is not exactly gaining an advantage in leaving the field of play. He is doing it to avoid contact with an opposing player and technically has to travel further to get to the ball again. I'd let play go on as long as the ball touches the ground or another player before he touches it again.

keeponhurling

Can anyone clarify what would the correct decision have been today for John Conlon's goal v Limerick in the hurling ?

He took clearly way too many steps,
But was also clearly being fouled.

Was the referee right to let the goal stand ?
Or should he have brought it back for the penalty ?
Thanks, not sure what the rule is here

Fandango

keeponhurling wrote: »

Can anyone clarify what would the correct decision have been today for John Conlon's goal v Limerick in the hurling ?

He took clearly way too many steps,
But was also clearly being fouled.

Was the referee right to let the goal stand ?
Or should he have brought it back for the penalty ?
Thanks, not sure what the rule is here

I would think the ruling should be advantage up to the point where the player over carried. So should have come back for the penalty as if both players committed a foul, he should return to the one that happened first. TBF, most refs would allow it if the defender is fouling also unless the attacking player goes way over the top on steps. Strictly by the rules though, I would think he should have come back for the penalty.

dastardly00

I think everyone should agree that the goal shouldn't have been allowed. Conlon took at least 15 steps before striking the ball.

What should have happened?
Conlon has the ball >> Conlon is fouled >> Ref plays advantage as Conlon is continuing towards the goal >> Conlon is overcarrying the sliotar >> Ref blows whistle for the initial foul on Conlon >> free to Clare.

I'm of the belief that if a player is being fouled, then they should be allowed a couple of extra steps in order to try and solo the ball off the hurley or get a pass away. But Conlon being allowed that many steps was a joke.

Davys Fits

The ref blew the whistle before conlon struck the ball. It should have been a penalty surely?

nice_guy80

Davys Fits wrote: »

The ref blew the whistle before conlon struck the ball. It should have been a penalty surely?

Exactly