The Integrity Of The CCCC

eire 2012

Lets see now if the integrity of the cccc stands up now after today's All Ireland Final.If it does then Shane o Neill will not be playing in the replay.They were very quick to overturn Patrick Horgans red against limerick and today Shane o Neill is clearly seen striking across the head with his hurl ,his second dangerous strike with the hurl this year.He should be having a nice month off now if the cccc is going to apply its own rules properly.

platypus

I agree they should deal with it, but can they when ref has already given a yellow for the incident?

shockframe

It would have ruined the game.
There's no cynicism in hurling.
He's not that type of player.
It was a great game.
Some great skills on show.
This isnt Football.
Their trying to take the manliness out of the game.
It detracts from what a great game it was.
Hurling is the greatest game in the world.
There's no malice in him.

'Lather, Rinse and repeat.'

eire 2012

platypus wrote: »

I agree they should deal with it, but can they when ref has already given a yellow for the incident?

The certainly dealt with John Dalton a few years ago after the league final even though he got a yellow card so that shouldn't be an issue

keeponhurling

A stroke to the back of the head with the Hurley, when the ball is not neat them, is a very dangerous act.
GAA could do with sending out a message that is isn't tolerated, and that would benefit all levels of hurling.

I'm not sure the ref saw it clearly though, so they could look at TV footage?!

We,ll see in the next few days

rebel girl 15

eire 2012, its definitely not a case of the CCCC following its own rules, because they cannot.

Going back to the Dalton incident, the only reason the CCCC could intervene was because the referee, Wadding I think did not see the incident, it certainly was not dealt with on the field of play. Dalton did not get a yellow for it

In Shane O Neill's case, it was a red card offense, but it was dealt with on the field of play by the referee, who issued him with a yellow card. They, the CCCC, cannot review it, because it was deemed to have been dealt with on the field of play.

Browney7

rebel girl 15 wrote: »

eire 2012, its definitely not a case of the CCCC following its own rules, because they cannot.

Going back to the Dalton incident, the only reason the CCCC could intervene was because the referee, Wadding I think did not see the incident, it certainly was not dealt with on the field of play. Dalton did not get a yellow for it

In Shane O Neill's case, it was a red card offense, but it was dealt with on the field of play by the referee, who issued him with a yellow card. They, the CCCC, cannot review it, because it was deemed to have been dealt with on the field of play.

Is there something though that they can ask the ref if he would have given a red in the aftermath? I seem to recall something like this happening before. Maybe I'm imagining it

Motivator

If the Shane o Neil incident have of happened later in the game then it would have been a red card. It was plain to see on Brian Gavin's face that he knew it was a red as well but he didn't want to ruin the game.

Clare certainly can't blame Brian Gavin for them not winning the game, it's not his fault they bottled it.

shockframe

Classic from Brian Carthy.Right on cue.

'I thought the referee had a great game today'

Liam O'Neill agrees.It was a great game.

rebel girl 15

Browney7 wrote: »

Is there something though that they can ask the ref if he would have given a red in the aftermath? I seem to recall something like this happening before. Maybe I'm imagining it

I'm not 100% sure about this, but I will be checking with a friend of mine. I think it happened to Tyrone a few years ago, a player was banned retrospectively - but the catch is that I think it was a black card issued, not a yellow. There was nothing in the rulebook about the black card at the time, so technically it wasn't dealt with. Any recent CCCC review has been when there was video footage of the incident, but it has not been dealt with it on the pitch.

[-0-]

Motivator wrote: »

If the Shane o Neil incident have of happened later in the game then it would have been a red card. It was plain to see on Brian Gavin's face that he knew it was a red as well but he didn't want to ruin the game.

Clare certainly can't blame Brian Gavin for them not winning the game, it's not his fault they bottled it.

How did Clare bottle it, exactly?

They bottled nothing.

keeponhurling

O'Neills stroke was out of place really and should have been punished.

What stood out today was the level of skills these teams have, great score taking, high catching, hooking, blocking etc.
Lots of smaller lads on both teams, T.Kelly, Podge, Kearney, McLaughlin, Galvin etc.
Showing that hurling doesn't need to be about roughing up your man, it's about te pure skills of the game.
Kelly and Podge are a joy to watch

Fr Tod Umptious

It was dealt with on the field therefore it cannot be reviewed
That rule has been in place for about three seasons now,prior to then it would have been reviewable

Ace2007

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

It was dealt with on the field therefore it cannot be reviewed
That rule has been in place for about three seasons now,prior to then it would have been reviewable

if the ref gave a yellow for hurl on head then he should be barred himself from being a ref again.

I can only assume he gave yellow for all the ball barging with Clare guy

Daroxtar

Official request gone in from Clare county board to have Martin Sludden instated as ref for the replay as he couldn't be any worse than Gavin

Fr Tod Umptious

Ace2007 wrote: »

if the ref gave a yellow for hurl on head then he should be barred himself from being a ref again.

I can only assume he gave yellow for all the ball barging with Clare guy

That's a good point, what offense did he give the yellow for, and thus is the other offense reviewable

ebbsy

shockframe wrote: »

Classic from Brian Carthy.Right on cue.

'I thought the referee had a great game today'

Liam O'Neill agrees.It was a great game.

He had a great game alright, from a Cork point of view.

Kept them in it the whole way.

rebel girl 15

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

That's a good point, what offense did he give the yellow for, and thus is the other offense reviewable

I do believe that Honan actually hit O Neill on the head first during the tussle for the ball, though that could be accidental, which is why O Neill hit Honan - its no excuse for only getting a yellow

Jarjohn

eire 2012 wrote: »

Lets see now if the integrity of the cccc stands up now after today's All Ireland Final.If it does then Shane o Neill will not be playing in the replay.They were very quick to overturn Patrick Horgans red against limerick and today Shane o Neill is clearly seen striking across the head with his hurl ,his second dangerous strike with the hurl this year.He should be having a nice month off now if the cccc is going to apply its own rules properly.

Incident was dealt with by ref and I don't think a witch hunt on Shane O Neill is proper, and also the way Davy Fitz covered it in interview after was piss poor. All players involved deserve to be part of replay.

eire 2012

Jarjohn wrote: »

Incident was dealt with by ref and I don't think a witch hunt on Shane O Neill is proper, and also the way Davy Fitz covered it in interview after was piss poor. All players involved deserve to be part of replay.

The ref also dealt with the Pat Horgan incident but we all know what happened there.This has to be dealt with its his second offence in three matches does he have to knock someone out or what before there is repercussions for him.If a Kk player had done this twice in three matches the whinging on here and in national media would be unbearable.

rebel girl 15

eire 2012 wrote: »

The ref also dealt with the Pat Horgan incident but we all know what happened there.This has to be dealt with its his second offence in three matches does he have to knock someone out or what before there is repercussions for him.If a Kk player had done this twice in three matches the whinging on here and in national media would be unbearable.

Decisions can be appealed, but the CCCC cannot upgrade decision made on the pitch

eire 2012

rebel girl 15 wrote: »

Decisions can be appealed, but the CCCC cannot upgrade decision made on the pitch

That's fine but Gavin didn't see the incident and was only going on umpires directions so there could be grounds for this still to be investigated but I doubt anything will happen sure it would ruin the replay and only cork are allowed play against 14

keeponhurling

Maybe I'm paranoid, but the chances of CCCC taking action over O'Neill's strike is heavily correlated with how much time RTE spend on this incident on the Sunday Game!

eire 2012

keeponhurling wrote: »

Maybe I'm paranoid, but the chances of CCCC taking action over O'Neill's strike is heavily correlated with how much time RTE spend on this incident on the Sunday Game!

It will be brushed over don't worry Donal Og won't have seen anything and Shane o Neill will be lucky to have stayed on the pitch he is not that type etc etc I'd say it will go something like that

rebel girl 15

eire 2012 wrote: »

That's fine but Gavin didn't see the incident and was only going on umpires directions so there could be grounds for this still to be investigated but I doubt anything will happen sure it would ruin the replay and only cork are allowed play against 14

He definitely saw it alright, sure what did he give the yellow card for, when O Neill was behind Honan, and he was on his way in to speak to the two lads anyway!!!

Seems like you have a bit of a witch hunt against Cork with that last comment, seems like the Munster final v Limerick has been forgotten about!

awec

keeponhurling wrote: »

Maybe I'm paranoid, but the chances of CCCC taking action over O'Neill's strike is heavily correlated with how much time RTE spend on this incident on the Sunday Game!

Not a mention so far.

Ace2007

awec wrote: »

Not a mention so far.

skimmed over it...

awec

Ace2007 wrote: »

skimmed over it...

I think they mentioned it for about a second.

They're being very critical of Gavin without talking about this incident specifically.

eire 2012

Typical Sunday game serious incident didn't suit them to discuss it brushed over it load of b****x they were able to highlight other teams with Mickey mouse fouls but there is no agenda with either of these teams

Ace2007

awec wrote: »

I think they mentioned it for about a second.

They're being very critical of Gavin without talking about this incident specifically.

funny that in the football Cavanagh's foul got so much coverage, but yet in hurling you can strike a guy across the head with a hurl and only get a yellow and a second coverage on TV.

Regarding Ref's - do they come together and get trained on how to ref, and their performance reviewed, or how is it done?

rebel girl 15

Cavanagh's got so much coverage because it stopped a goal chance.

An assessor would have been in the stands today assessing Gavin's performance. But from what I've heard is that assessors aren't good enough. If referees were to go by the rulebook, the game wouldn't be freeflowing which is what the supporters want. So referees are left between a rock and a hard place about the implementation of the rulebook. The problem with McEnaney as head of the referees is that he is a football ref. Hurling referees need a separate body nearly, and separate rules for certain things. He came out at the start of the year and said there was eight or nine red cards that should have been handed out in the 2012 championship, but were not. That put pressure on the referees straight away.

A panel of intercounty referees are picked, have a number of different tests done, rules and fitness included.

Fr Tod Umptious

eire 2012 wrote: »

That's fine but Gavin didn't see the incident and was only going on umpires directions so there could be grounds for this still to be investigated but I doubt anything will happen sure it would ruin the replay and only cork are allowed play against 14

It does not matter where the ref gets his info from, whether he sees it himself or whether he consults his umpires, if he deals with an incident on the field then that is that

downthemiddle

Jarjohn wrote: »

Incident was dealt with by ref and I don't think a witch hunt on Shane O Neill is proper, and also the way Davy Fitz covered it in interview after was piss poor. All players involved deserve to be part of replay.

No they don't.Shane O'Neill should be suspended.

eire 2012

downthemiddle wrote: »

No they don't.Shane O'Neill should be suspended.

He was lucky he wasnt already suspended for today after his full lenght swing across Eoin Larkin

copacetic

awec wrote: »

I think they mentioned it for about a second.

They're being very critical of Gavin without talking about this incident specifically.

They said it was a red and a clear strike to the head, what more could they have said?

Ace2007

copacetic wrote: »

They said it was a red and a clear strike to the head, what more could they have said?

Did they make a deal out of it? talked about it for 20 seconds.

Had the Ref sent someone off for a nothing challenge - there would be talking about it for 10 mins.

awec

copacetic wrote: »

They said it was a red and a clear strike to the head, what more could they have said?

I think the incident deserved more highlighting than the few seconds it got. In the grand scheme of things it was a fairly major incident - they were happy to discuss Gavin's poor display but seemed reluctant to talk about the one incident that should have seen Cork reduced a man.

It really was a complete "ah sure this happened, NEXT".

copacetic

I think ye need to take the blinkers off to be honest. They generally spend time on incidents when there is a debate to be had, during the live coverage and on the highlights they replayed it from 3 angles and pointed out it should have been a red and would have been a red in other games. They all agreed and moved on to other decisions that were a bit more in grey areas. There was nothing more to be said about it really, they certainly spent a lot more than ' a second' on it and there was no reluctance to talk or mention it. They did.

premierstone

eire 2012 wrote: »

If a Kk player had done this twice in three matches the whinging on here and in national media would be unbearable.

eire 2012 wrote: »

I doubt anything will happen sure it would ruin the replay and only cork are allowed play against 14

eire 2012 wrote: »

It will be brushed over don't worry Donal Og won't have seen anything and Shane o Neill will be lucky to have stayed on the pitch he is not that type etc etc I'd say it will go something like that

eire 2012 wrote: »

He was lucky he wasnt already suspended for today after his full lenght swing across Eoin Larkin

Do you wan't some salt with that chip on your shoulder eire, get over it Cork beat KK fair and square, there was no conspiracy no vendetta, ye were simply beaten by a better team.

dcr22B

Browney7 wrote: »

Is there something though that they can ask the ref if he would have given a red in the aftermath? I seem to recall something like this happening before. Maybe I'm imagining it

Collie Moran against Westmeath in 2008 IIRC

relaxed

[-0-] wrote: »

How did Clare bottle it, exactly?

They bottled nothing.

Podge Collins missed a chance to close the game with a goal.

In the first half Honan missed a goal chance to open a commanding lead.

willietherock

premierstone wrote: »

Do you wan't some salt with that chip on your shoulder eire, get over it Cork beat KK fair and square, there was no conspiracy no vendetta, ye were simply beaten by a better team.

From a Cork pt of view the utter and total lack of class coming out of KK makes their demise all the sweeter.

premierstone

relaxed wrote: »

Podge Collins missed a chance to close the game with a goal.

In the first half Honan missed a goal chance to open a commanding lead.

Hardly bottling it now, Honan's chance resulted in a top top class reflex save from Nash, that would have beaten 90% of keepers and Collins chance was hardly a sitter either, I dont think he had time to lift it so the kick was the right option just poorly executed - been unlucky does not equate to bottling it.

If anything Clare's mental fortitude and mental qualities were enhanced by yesterdays events rather than diminished. To stay standing and come back after the sucker punches they took was admirable and while I have been a critic of Davy, you would have to admire the belief he has instilled in these lads, I know we in Tipp could do with some of what they have.

Martin567

willietherock wrote: »

From a Cork pt of view the utter and total lack of class coming out of KK makes their demise all the sweeter.

How would you describe the attitude of a number of Cork people to Kilkenny's success over the past decade? Just one example. If Donal O'Grady had any integrity, he would no longer be doing punditry work on RTE. He gets at least one snide dig at Kilkenny every time he's in the commentary box, even when Kilkenny are not playing. If he's unable to be impartial and hide his bitterness, then he shouldn't be there.

marco_polo

relaxed wrote: »

Podge Collins missed a chance to close the game with a goal.

In the first half Honan missed a goal chance to open a commanding lead.

It was a poor decision to kick the ball in hindsight, but a performance worthy of a MOTM nomination is hardly bottling it.

Honan might have connected a little better but it was a difficult enough chance(he struck it on the turn I think?), and as we have seen in this championship so far, it takes more than a decent shot to beat Nash.

premierstone

Martin567 wrote: »

How would you describe the attitude of a number of Cork people to Kilkenny's success over the past decade? Just one example. If Donal O'Grady had any integrity, he would no longer be doing punditry work on RTE. He gets at least one snide dig at Kilkenny every time he's in the commentary box, even when Kilkenny are not playing. If he's unable to be impartial and hide his bitterness, then he shouldn't be there.

ohh ohh did someone say something remotely negative about KK its Martin to the rescue

The very notion of you accusing someone of been incapable of impartiality is laughable in the extreme, do we do irony much??

Martin567

premierstone wrote: »

ohh ohh did someone say something remotely negative about KK its Martin to the rescue

The very notion of you accusing someone of been incapable of impartiality is laughable in the extreme, do we do irony much??

Only what I've come to expect from you. You have no argument so you dish out the personal insults. It's a pattern at this stage. I'm not being paid to give impartial analysis on RTE.

Your attitude is typical. If a Kilkenny person complains about something, they're bitter and unable to accept defeat. If somebody from another county moans about Kilkenny, that's fair analysis and calling it as it is (and will likely attract a thumbs up from you).

premierstone

Martin567 wrote: »

Only what I've come to expect from you. You have no argument so you dish out the personal insults. It's a pattern at this stage. I'm not being paid to give impartial analysis on RTE.

Your attitude is typical. If a Kilkenny person complains about something, they're bitter and unable to accept defeat. If somebody from another county moans about Kilkenny, that's fair analysis and calling it as it is (and will likely attract a thumbs up from you).

If you actually bothered to read any of my posts you would see I am quite capable of being impartial and have praised anyone who has deserved it, I have praised KK on many many ocassions, I am quite comfortable with my posting style and can honestly say I always give an objective view, can you say the same??

Martin567

premierstone wrote: »

If you actually bothered to read any of my posts you would see I am quite capable of being impartial and have praised anyone who has deserved it, I have praised KK on many many ocassions, I am quite comfortable with my posting style and can honestly say I always give an objective view, can you say the same??

Self praise is no praise really. It's fair to say I'd have a different view. Reading your description of yourself above, the first thing that came to mind was Father Ted's description of Jack (when they thought he was dead) as a lovely, mild mannered person. To which Dougal asked "who's that you're talking about, Ted?"

From looking at our respective number of posts, I can see that you post about 5 times for every one of mine and I'm trying to cut back being here too much! I can fully see how I would come across as defensive of Kilkenny or whatever subject I'm posting on. But that's because I usually only post when I see something I strongly disagree with and nobody else has made the counter argument. I see lots of comments on here that I agree with but I see little reason to add to these as I would never get anything else done.

I'm sure you're capable of being objective but I think that's least in evidence where Kilkenny are concerned. The amount of casual bitterness towards Kilkenny on this and other media is significant. I mentioned O'Grady because I think he is a thorough disgrace. It very often seems as though Kilkenny are fair game for any abuse and seeing that you've thumbed up yet another one is hardly going to lead me to consider you to be objective.

premierstone

Martin567 wrote: »

Self praise is no praise really. It's fair to say I'd have a different view. Reading your description of yourself above, the first thing that came to mind was Father Ted's description of Jack (when they thought he was dead) as a lovely, mild mannered person. To which Dougal asked "who's that you're talking about, Ted?"

From looking at our respective number of posts, I can see that you post about 5 times for every one of mine and I'm trying to cut back being here too much! I can fully see how I would come across as defensive of Kilkenny or whatever subject I'm posting on. But that's because I usually only post when I see something I strongly disagree with and nobody else has made the counter argument. I see lots of comments on here that I agree with but I see little reason to add to these as I would never get anything else done.

I'm sure you're capable of being objective but I think that's least in evidence where Kilkenny are concerned. The amount of casual bitterness towards Kilkenny on this and other media is significant. I mentioned O'Grady because I think he is a thorough disgrace. It very often seems as though Kilkenny are fair game for any abuse and seeing that you've thumbed up yet another one is hardly going to lead me to consider you to be objective.

Maybe if you actually posted on something that didn't involve KK or if you were willing to accept some of their falings, which everyone has, your posts might have a little more credance, we can all use the post history to see the evidence for ourselves.

Ace2007

Martin567 wrote: »

From looking at our respective number of posts, I can see that you post about 5 times for every one of mine and I'm trying to cut back being here too much! I can fully see how I would come across as defensive of Kilkenny or whatever subject I'm posting on. But that's because I usually only post when I see something I strongly disagree with and nobody else has made the counter argument. I see lots of comments on here that I agree with but I see little reason to add to these as I would never get anything else done.

it's closer to 10 times;)