Hawkeye

Neeson

How difficult is it for a man standing below the post to see the ball go 2/3 feet to the wrong side of the post. Does he not watch the ball and its flight path? He must be too busy focusing on all those for fellows out there instead of doing what he's meant to.

They'd be better off letting children do it. The old arseholes can't see a thing.

BigCon

tomasdeb wrote: »

Yes, I would expect that the text is customisable if the GAA bothered to ask. The word MISS does strike me as odd - a bit like using "kick off" for a GAA match or "throw in" for a soccer match.

My guess is that this wording was selected to allow for situations where the shot was deflected off a defender "wide" would be incorrect, whereas "miss" would be slightly more accurate (of course 45 or 65 would be best, but Hawkeye couldn't decide this)...

washman3

Hammer Archer wrote: »

Or maybe just to be absolutely sure it was wide

Might as well call on it for every score/wide if we apply that logic..

Hammer Archer

washman3 wrote: »

Might as well call on it for every score/wide if we apply that logic..

If, for whatever reason, the referee isn't sure that it was a score then he can call on Hawkeye. The referee obviously wasn't 100% sure in this instance.

theoneeyedman

Hammer Archer wrote: »

If, for whatever reason, the referee isn't sure that it was a score then he can call on Hawkeye. The referee obviously wasn't 100% sure in this instance.

In last weeks incident, I heard it reported that tge initial query came from mr hawkeye rather than the ref. Ref and umpire were happy giving the score but he got word in hus ear apparently saying computer says no.
This seems a strange set of affairs to me and is outside the remit of the origional ssystem imo

InchicoreDude

theoneeyedman wrote: »

In last weeks incident, I heard it reported that tge initial query came from mr hawkeye rather than the ref. Ref and umpire were happy giving the score but he got word in hus ear apparently saying computer says no.
This seems a strange set of affairs to me and is outside the remit of the origional ssystem imo

I'd agree on this. It should be down to referee to consult Hawkeye, nobody else (the umpire should be able to advise the referee) but it should always be the referee who decides.

All the other negativity towards Hawk eye on this is just pure bananas though!

Umpiring can be difficult take your eye off the ball for a second and you miss whether it went over.

tomasdeb

MrJoeSoap wrote: »

I was referring to the fact that it was used and made the right call. The call to use it in the first place is another issue.

If I recall correctly, Hawkeye was called on once and got it right. But there didn't appear to be any need to call on it as the ball was clearly wide. Apart from showing it works perhaps...

shawnee

tomasdeb wrote: »

If I recall correctly, Hawkeye was called on once and got it right. But there didn't appear to be any need to call on it as the ball was clearly wide. Apart from showing it works perhaps...

Or that it doesn't work !:P!

rebel girl 15

theoneeyedman wrote: »

In last weeks incident, I heard it reported that the initial query came from mr hawkeye rather than the ref. Ref and umpire were happy giving the score but he got word in hus ear apparently saying computer says no.
This seems a strange set of affairs to me and is outside the remit of the original system imo

The referee shouldn't have got that signal, and it is completely outside of the remit of the system. It does seems to explain why the referee and umpire gave the score, Galway were on the attack from their puckout yet play was stopped. The referee must have been sure to leave Galway take their puckout!

"A Referee or an umpire may seek clarification on whether a ball has gone between the posts for a point or outside the post for a wide or 45/65" is the quote used when it was announced that Hawkeye was to be used.

I can understand why the football value would give that result, as if the ball touched the post like that, it would have dropped over, and Hawkeye would not have had to be employed to check the score. Its like anything, the technology is sound when used in the correct manner by the correct people!

tomasdeb

rebel girl 15 wrote: »

The referee shouldn't have got that signal, and it is completely outside of the remit of the system. It does seems to explain why the referee and umpire gave the score, Galway were on the attack from their puckout yet play was stopped. The referee must have been sure to leave Galway take their puckout!

"A Referee or an umpire may seek clarification on whether a ball has gone between the posts for a point or outside the post for a wide or 45/65" is the quote used when it was announced that Hawkeye was to be used.

I can understand why the football value would give that result, as if the ball touched the post like that, it would have dropped over, and Hawkeye would not have had to be employed to check the score. Its like anything, the technology is sound when used in the correct manner by the correct people!

This is one of the key questions that needs to be answered. The referee and umpires had got it right if they had been left to their own devices. So who initiated the hawkeye intervention? Does this mean that someone other than the referee can call the shots? If so, are there implications for the concept that the referee's decision is final? Is this extra person responsible to the GAA or to the hawkeye company and should he/she be identified as a match official in the interests of transparency? Perhaps the answers are out there already but publication of the full facts and results of the investigation would help.

marco_polo

rebel girl 15 wrote: »

The referee shouldn't have got that signal, and it is completely outside of the remit of the system. It does seems to explain why the referee and umpire gave the score, Galway were on the attack from their puckout yet play was stopped. The referee must have been sure to leave Galway take their puckout!

"A Referee or an umpire may seek clarification on whether a ball has gone between the posts for a point or outside the post for a wide or 45/65" is the quote used when it was announced that Hawkeye was to be used.

I can understand why the football value would give that result, as if the ball touched the post like that, it would have dropped over, and Hawkeye would not have had to be employed to check the score. Its like anything, the technology is sound when used in the correct manner by the correct people!

It was definitely mentioned in a few articles at the time that the review official can intervene if an incorrect decision has been made, even if the ball remains in play (The goalkeeper bats back a ball that had passed over the crossbar etc. ). But the guidelines on the GAA site don't make any mention of the scenario where an incorrect decision is made by the umpire(only where no decision is made), which is rather odd.

rebel girl 15

Its as clear a case as any that the rules were left deliberately vague - the rule that was passed by Congress was the one that I quoted above, no where did it mention the fact that a review official can overrule a referee in the awarding of a score. I would dispute that issue, simply because Hawkeye may have calculated the score as a miss, by the graphic it generated was consistent with the path of the sliotar over the crossbar which was a point.

Anyone ever wonder why the 2013 Official Guide Part 2 has not been published on the website yet, yet Part 1 2013 is there, and has been there for months?? Thats because the exact rules as to the referee are in that section, and its the section that Hawkeye would fall under.

As tomasdeb mentioned the question remains, why did the referee go to Hawkeye? He had awarded a point, the umpire signalled a point. Why go to Hawkeye at that time, and not immediately after the score? Why did he not consult the linesman about the score? Why did he not award the point, despite the graphic showing clearly that the ball went over the bar? Why did the referee go with the wording, rather than the graphic?

You have to admire the GAA though for the political nous and the PR gang they have working up there - if you delve into the situation and examine it closely, it really appears that there was an official had a word into the ear of the referee, which is completely against the ethos of bringing Hawkeye in - Hawkeye was brought it to assist referees in awarding scores, not to overrule referees. Yet the GAA come out without any blame at all - the company took the fall out, and the rest of the media was dominated by the Limerick appeal.

The rule quoted against the Limerick appeal "No objection or counter-objection maybe submitted on grounds that a referee had incorrectly allowed or failed to allow a score” can be appealed on the basis that was it the referee that had the power there, or was it some other official?? The referee had correctly allowed the score, without any hesitation, so why the need for Hawkeye?

petronius

Galway could earn a lot of positive PR by making a joint bid with Limerick for a rematch
I think that would solve the problem and show sportsmanship

bruschi

petronius wrote: »

Galway could earn a lot of positive PR by making a joint bid with Limerick for a rematch
I think that would solve the problem and show sportsmanship

Limerick could earn a lot of positive PR by leaving it go. They made their point, leave it be. It was unfortunate what happened, but they got a phantom free to earn a draw. they arent the first team to have a score wrongly not given.

Roger_007

petronius wrote: »

Galway could earn a lot of positive PR by making a joint bid with Limerick for a rematch
I think that would solve the problem and show sportsmanship

It is not the function of either side involved in a controversial match or incident to "offer" a replay. When the 'sluddengate' incident occurred I think I heard the Meath manager say that his job and the job of the team was to play or replay whatever games the Leinster Council decided and they would comply with whatever decision the Leinster Council made on the matter.
Even though I'm a Louth supporter I had to agree. If there is a dispute, it is the function of whichever body organised the competition to resolve the dispute. Anything else is just a cop-out by the organisers and would lead to chaos.

zetecescort

petronius wrote: »

Galway could earn a lot of positive PR by making a joint bid with Limerick for a rematch
I think that would solve the problem and show sportsmanship

and possibly lose their place in an All Ireland final. Limerick had 59 minutes to win the game after the hawkeye incident. not good enough, Galway won, move on

hardCopy

petronius wrote: »

Galway could earn a lot of positive PR by making a joint bid with Limerick for a rematch
I think that would solve the problem and show sportsmanship

PR won't win them an all Ireland. They have more important things to worry about.

Any match can be won or lost due to bad or questionable decisions. If you have a score disallowed all you can do is win the ball and score again.

WumBuster

zetecescort wrote: »

and possibly lose their place in an All Ireland final. Limerick had 59 minutes to win the game after the hawkeye incident. not good enough, Galway won, move on

of course they could lose their place in the AI final which would be rough on the youngfellas but its an amateur sport and fair play needs to be to the forefront. I think that the best thing to do at this stage is for Galway to offer a replay. Of course they dont have to but it would give some closure to the issue, not something we are going to get from hapless GAA officials who seem to be all at sea. The final is a week on Sunday, so it needs to be next weekend.

bruschi

WumBuster wrote: »

of course they could lose their place in the AI final which would be rough on the youngfellas but its an amateur sport and fair play needs to be to the forefront. I think that the best thing to do at this stage is for Galway to offer a replay. Of course they dont have to but it would give some closure to the issue, not something we are going to get from hapless GAA officials who seem to be all at sea. The final is a week on Sunday, so it needs to be next weekend.

how are they all at sea? they have repeatedly said there is no grounds for a replay

theoneeyedman

Another example in minor game today. Tyrone point flagged wide only for ref to call hawkeye in after seeing tv replay. Is this not beyond the remit of the system. Lyster at half time was at pains to stress it was Hawkeye itself that called the point
but looking at it it looked different and some GAA pr head fed him a line

Hammer Archer

Similar thing happened last year in the Leinster final only without Hawkeye (point was given via the TV replay).
Right decision was made. Not sure what the umpires were doing. It was halfway up the post and wasn't hit with any power so they should have seen that it was a point.

tomasdeb

theoneeyedman wrote: »

Another example in minor game today. Tyrone point flagged wide only for ref to call hawkeye in after seeing tv replay. Is this not beyond the remit of the system. Lyster at half time was at pains to stress it was Hawkeye itself that called the point
but looking at it it looked different and some GAA pr head fed him a line

It certainnly looked as if the ref used the big screen. I'd probably do the same if I were him but is it within his remit to call hawkeye on this basis? If not, should it be?
Lyster did seem to be anxious to say that it was hawkeye that initiated the intervention but didn't offer any reason for this claim?
I thought that Spillane's comment that "its now 1 all between haweye and the umpires" was inappropriate - this is not something to be laughed off.....

theoneeyedman

Firstly the correct decision was made.
But.....afaik Hawkeye is there to back up ref and his team. I understood the ref would call for clarification if they were unsure. Now it seems the tail is wagging the dog and the Hawkeye man is calling the shots.
Also is there any rule that allows a ref to use video like this?
I don't have a philosophical objection to this but if it being used we should be upfront about it and legislate for it in the rules. Based on this would we expect a ref to change a decision during a club game based on a video on a mobile phone?

washman3

Hammer Archer wrote: »

Similar thing happened last year in the Leinster final only without Hawkeye (point was given via the TV replay).
Right decision was made. Not sure what the umpires were doing. It was halfway up the post and wasn't hit with any power so they should have seen that it was a point.

Or what was the linesman doing.? he was standing directly behind the player that kicked the score and could plainly see that it was a point.

PTH2009

if limerick win the DRA case, can Galway still refuse to play them in a replay.

Id imagine if a replay takes place it may be held in Croke Park on Sat 7th Sep (Final still to be played on the 8th) or possbily it will be played instead of the final on the 8th and then the minor final will be played as a double header with the Under 21 final on the 14th Sep in Croke Park (if Antrim win there case and get the under 21 final moved to croke park or somewhere else)