The Black Card Its A Joke!

ItsPodgy

A lot of people probably would agree with me on this one, if they seen it in action. The rule is not implemented correctly at all and in my opinion confuses refs, players and fans.

Recently I was at the O'Fiaich Cup final. A pre-season "Mickey Mouse" cup. During the course of this cup the black card was in play. In the final Derry faced Armagh. In a fair, hard hitting contest. But in this game two black cards were awarded for tackles that were almost the exact same as any other normal tackle.

One was when the Derry wing-forward ran down the side-line and as the wing-back ran behind him he fell, bringing the Derry man with him. People in the stands accept this, because they probably thought that is what its for "Fair Enough".

But at the other end of the pitch Clarke was tackled from behind in a more aggressive manner being purposefully dragged down. Yet nothing, fans in the stand asked where is the black card now? But no answer was given of course!

So I want to ask people what do you make of the black card?

In my opinion it wouldn't have been introduced if it wasn't for Brollys rant about Sean Cavanagh.

Will it end up like the sin bin rule? Your thoughts on it would be great!

Jake Rugby Walrus666

In the early stages there may be an element of referees going out very concious of having black cards in their pocket, and that they think they should be giving them out, and worried they'll miss a supposed black card moment.

When everyone calms down a little a bit. A lot of games need ever be officiated any different to before. If theres a feeling that theres a bit of strategic holding up, delaying the opposition in certain areas of the field then a little Black Attack could send a message.

Although maybe there's a nagging feeling that the whole thing is a disastrous, ill thought out, misconceived, missing the actual point, disaster waiting to happen.

Who knows.

ProudDUB

ItsPodgy wrote: »

So I want to ask people what do you make of the black card?

In my opinion it wouldn't have been introduced if it wasn't for Brollys rant about Sean Cavanagh.

The black card motion passed Congress back in March. Brolly's rant about Sean Cavanagh only took place in August. They don't have anything to do with each other.

Realt Dearg Sec

New rules need time to bed in. It's a habit in the GAA that people immediately pine on new stuff and tear it asunder before it's had a chance to play out. Judging the whole concept as a joke based on some meaningless game in mid winner before refs and players have had any chance to get use to it in practice is the definition of being reactionary. Blaming it on brolly is, obviously, nonsensical, but anyway...

slingerz

think its a good rule generally the problem will be the bad refs and there interpreation of it.#

its a black card for a deliberate foot trip, deliberate rugby tackle, dissent to the ref so i dont expect them to be lashed out willy nilly.

the advantage rule will be beneifcal provided the refs are capable of using it properly. at local level, it may take a while as the bad refs will struggle with it

nice_guy80

I can forsee a lot of play acting to get key players on a team black carded

slingerz

nice_guy80 wrote: »

I can forsee a lot of play acting to get key players on a team black carded

it wont work like that. its pretty clear what constitutes a black card if you look it up.

DD Mikasa

But u know one or two referees will get it completely wrong in their interpretation and a big outcry will ensue. If used with a modicum of common sense it will be a good idea but I can see it becoming farcical due to human error

slingerz

DD Mikasa wrote: »

But u know one or two referees will get it completely wrong in their interpretation and a big outcry will ensue. If used with a modicum of common sense it will be a good idea but I can see it becoming farcical due to human error

at local level i can see there being some farces alright but at intercounty and senior level i reckon it should be ok and after all those levels are the only ones that make the newspaper headlines

Realt Dearg Sec

slingerz wrote: »

at local level i can see there being some farces alright but at intercounty and senior level i reckon it should be ok and after all those levels are the only ones that make the newspaper headlines

Except, of course, when there's a ref in the boot of a megane up the Dublin mountains after.

slingerz

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

Except, of course, when there's a ref in the boot of a megane up the Dublin mountains after.

hope Stuart Carolan is reading this, would make a great storyline for Love/Hate!!

ItsPodgy

ProudDUB wrote: »

The black card motion passed Congress back in March. Brolly's rant about Sean Cavanagh only took place in August. They don't have anything to do with each other.

Alright sorry I didn't know that but, that was just a go at Brolly. Haaa!

feargale

I don't know if it's appropriate to raise it here but refs frequently blow up the old fashioned fair shoulder, while the jersey pull ( awful to watch ) goes almost totally unpunished.

tayto lover

The referees can't implement the rules we already have FFS.
Not a thing has happened about bad refereeing since Sluddengate because the GAA hierarchy hasn't the balls.

Realt Dearg Sec

feargale wrote: »

I don't know if it's appropriate to raise it here, but I see refs frequently punishing the old fashioned fair shoulder, while the jersey pull ( awful to watch ) seems to go almost totally unpunished

Very much agree. Drives me mental playing junior hurling and they ref all three physicality out of the game but let go all the sneaky but un physical stuff.

Grats

Something needed to be introduced to eliminate the cynical fouling. The black card should help. However I agree that refs already struggle with the current rules and their interpretation. In the 2013 championship refs appeared under pressure to implement rules and so much so that many decisions had to be rescinded later. Incidents such as Patrick Horgan's, Ryan O'Dwyer and Henry Shefflin spring to mind. All three had a bearing on the match outcome. It suited the hierarchy to brush the consequences aside as a matter of urgency as they were the ones putting the pressure on the refs.

I can't imagine what it'll be like with these new rules but hopefully we don't get a repeat of last years and the effect it had on results.

smileyj1987

In theory I think it could eliminate a lot of the cynical fouling during games and needed to be introduced . The only bad point is the fact that it's down to how good the officials are . If you have bad ones you could see a lot of bad decisions given .

slingerz

it gets rid of the dissent from players as a black card is the retort for this and ends that players game early.

rpurfield

Like all new things it will take a while to settle in, we will all see some mad things in the early season competitions because of it, possibly even as far as the early championship rounds. What would really take the edge of cynical fouling is proper application of the yellow card and a system where you got a match ban for two or three of them in the course of a competition the same way you see in soccer.

tayto lover

Referees had enough cards already to deal with any problem of fouling.
Another card will only complicate issues for them even more.
There are no two referees the same and what is blown up this week is let go next week.
No uniformity in the refereeing game at all and that need fixing more than anything else.

Pharaoh1

tayto lover wrote: »

Referees had enough cards already to deal with any problem of fouling.
Another card will only complicate issues for them even more.
There are no two referees the same and what is blown up this week is let go next week.
No uniformity in the refereeing game at all and that need fixing more than anything else.

The best way to eliminate/reduce cynical fouling would of course be to have a proper competition match ban suspension system to follow yellow and red carding.
But unfortunately given the structure of the inter county football championship in particular this is simply impossible.
The black card system is at least an attempt to do something and we'll have to see how it goes. I wouldn't be at all surprised if it more or less ignored at club level.

Stinicker

Good bye Ulster football until they adapt, this rule will also severely hinder Dublin. I can see counties like Kerry and Galway benefit from it as they play a more pure and clean brand of football with more long kicking and less short-passing and general negativity.

aveytare

Stinicker wrote: »

Good bye Ulster football until they adapt, this rule will also severely hinder Dublin. I can see counties like Kerry and Galway benefit from it as they play a more pure and clean brand of football with more long kicking and less short-passing and general negativity.

Mr. Incognito

It's a stupid idea.

The rules were fine as they were if the refs had the bottle to send players to the line for cynical tackles, which rugby tackling was.

The consistency of the referees is lacking. They are encouraged to leave play go and let the game develop and "apply common sense".

This is nonsense. If the referees applied the rules, consistently then a lot of the cynical tackling would disappear.

It's like the northern tackle when three players would surround a lad and knock lumps out of him. The refs let it go for the first season or two and after that blew it for a free and it has largely disappeared as teams look to move the ball first time and not take it into contact.

keane2097

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

The rules were fine as they were if the refs had the bottle to send players to the line for cynical tackles, which rugby tackling was.

I'd be interested to see which rule the ref would have been applying to send players off for cynical tackles under the old rules?

K4t

The black card is insane. One bad decision or mistake from a referee or player and the player is sent off. Madness.

KevIRL

2 black cards tonight in the O Byrne Cup opener. One had a replacement allowed on 49 mins, the other no replacement was allowed as the player had earlier gotten a yellow

StupidLikeAFox

It could be a handy way to waste time coming to the end of a match. There is plenty of scope for killing time between the player committing the foul, getting shown the black card, protesting about the black card and throwing the hands up in the air, trotting off the pitch, then the replacement player togging out and trotting onto the pitch. In the last five minutes if 3 or 4 players decided to get shown a black card it would effectively kill off the game.

I hope refs are wise to this and have some strategy to counteract it

Realt Dearg Sec

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

It could be a handy way to waste time coming to the end of a match. There is plenty of scope for killing time between the player committing the foul, getting shown the black card, protesting about the black card and throwing the hands up in the air, trotting off the pitch, then the replacement player togging out and trotting onto the pitch. In the last five minutes if 3 or 4 players decided to get shown a black card it would effectively kill off the game.

I hope refs are wise to this and have some strategy to counteract it

Upgrade to a red card for time wasting

tayto lover

There'll soon be a pink card in for "handbags" the way things are going.

gpat14

If you've used your 5 subs already and player gets a black card can he still be replaced?

Possible open to abuse if so, for example the AI final last year Dublin had 5 subs used and ended up playing with 13 men essentially. Had the black card been in place surely one of the injured guys could have more or less rugby tackled a Mayo player and then could be replaced by a fresher player from the line

Realt Dearg Sec

gpat14 wrote: »

If you've used your 5 subs already and player gets a black card can he still be replaced?

Possible open to abuse if so, for example the AI final last year Dublin had 5 subs used and ended up playing with 13 men essentially. Had the black card been in place surely one of the injured guys could have more or less rugby tackled a Mayo player and then could be replaced by a fresher player from the line

Pretty sure it's effectively a red card if you've used five subs, otherwise it would be a farce.

gpat14

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

Pretty sure it's effectively a red card if you've used five subs, otherwise it would be a farce.

I've just had a look and my understanding is you get 6 subs in a match (including 3 allowed for black card)

So it looks like you can't really use it to your advantage like I had feared.

rockonollie

Don't dismiss new rules just because it's being misenforced in the first set of games it's used in.........

give it at least through the end of pre-season competition and into the league.

Personally, I like the idea.....forces managers to go back to teaching football and give up the rugby-hybrid that some have brought into the game in the past decade.

DDC1990

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

It could be a handy way to waste time coming to the end of a match. There is plenty of scope for killing time between the player committing the foul, getting shown the black card, protesting about the black card and throwing the hands up in the air, trotting off the pitch, then the replacement player togging out and trotting onto the pitch. In the last five minutes if 3 or 4 players decided to get shown a black card it would effectively kill off the game.

I hope refs are wise to this and have some strategy to counteract it

Isn't the Countdown Clock coming into effect?

The referee will stop the clock for giving cards, which will eliminate any chance of time wasting.

rockonollie

gpat14 wrote: »

If you've used your 5 subs already and player gets a black card can he still be replaced?

Possible open to abuse if so, for example the AI final last year Dublin had 5 subs used and ended up playing with 13 men essentially. Had the black card been in place surely one of the injured guys could have more or less rugby tackled a Mayo player and then could be replaced by a fresher player from the line

You now have 6 substitutions total (3 of which can be for black card replacements)

So if a team has used 6 substitions and someone gets a black card, it is effectively a red card because the player cannot be replaced.

If a team has had 3 players black-carded and replaced, but hasn't used any other substitutions, and a 4th player gets a black card.....he cannot be replaced, the team will continue with 14 men, but still have 3 substitutions to use in the regular fashion.

TopOfTheRight

Hammer Archer

TopOfTheRight wrote: »

If I'm not mistaken, that's the Hasting's Cup game between Meath and Wicklow at the weekend. And I think that what the Meath player did should be a black card offence.
It's a black card offence for a defender to block an attacker off the ball so surely it should be the same if an attacker blocks a defender from making a tackle. But as far as I can see, this isn't the case even though it's just as cynical.

Hammer Archer

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

It could be a handy way to waste time coming to the end of a match. There is plenty of scope for killing time between the player committing the foul, getting shown the black card, protesting about the black card and throwing the hands up in the air, trotting off the pitch, then the replacement player togging out and trotting onto the pitch. In the last five minutes if 3 or 4 players decided to get shown a black card it would effectively kill off the game.

I hope refs are wise to this and have some strategy to counteract it

The substitute can't come on until the next break in play as far as I know.

DDC1990

Is the point that the Ref black card's the Wicklow player for saying "Wheres the fúcking black card ref?"? Its great if that is the case. Good to get that shíte out of the game, whinging and moaning at referees.

keane2097

Hammer Archer wrote: »

If I'm not mistaken, that's the Hasting's Cup game between Meath and Wicklow at the weekend. And I think that what the Meath player did should be a black card offence.
It's a black card offence for a defender to block an attacker off the ball so surely it should be the same if an attacker blocks a defender from making a tackle. But as far as I can see, this isn't the case even though it's just as cynical.

3. Deliberately body collide with an opponent after he has played the ball away or for the purpose of taking him out of a movement of play.

It's covered, just a bad decision by the ref.

zetecescort

dangerous precendent set now in replaying Munster colleges game

http://www.rte.ie/sport/gaa/2014/0130/501296-replay-ordered-in-munster-schools-black-card-row/

Fr Tod Umptious

zetecescort wrote: »

dangerous precendent set now in replaying Munster colleges game

http://www.rte.ie/sport/gaa/2014/0130/501296-replay-ordered-in-munster-schools-black-card-row/

Not really.
The ref just failed to apply the rules correctly.
The fact that it involved a black card is irrelevant

feargale

I always understood that the ref's rulings stood, even if the ref was blind and deaf.
I see a bigger issue here than the ref's error, namely the reported fact that two of the ref's assistants were Kerrymen. I don't know if there is rule governing this. If not, there should be, and what better time than now to introduce it? If there is a rule, then IMO that is a far more compelling reason to order a replay. Of course, a further issue might arise if the Cork boys knowingly consented to play in the circumstances. But what is a team supposed to do having travelled to play, to discover this there and then?
If I were the headmaster of Criost Ri I would see the biggest issue of all in that alot of the players are presumably preparing for Leaving Cert. and they could do without a prolonged distraction of this kind.

zetecescort

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Not really.
The ref just failed to apply the rules correctly.
The fact that it involved a black card is irrelevant

But sure the arguement could be made of not applying the rules if no free is awarded for a double hop, pickup off the ground or any other rule infringement. This replay opens a can of worms imo.

Grats

zetecescort wrote: »

dangerous precendent set now in replaying Munster colleges game

http://www.rte.ie/sport/gaa/2014/0130/501296-replay-ordered-in-munster-schools-black-card-row/

Exactly, thoroughly agree. How many times have refs made mistakes that led to the final outcome and there was no going back.

thinkstoomuch1

zetecescort wrote: »

But sure the arguement could be made of not applying the rules if no free is awarded for a double hop, pickup off the ground or any other rule infringement. This replay opens a can of worms imo.

Complete nonense.keep it real.That scenario is completly different to last wednesdays .It only opens a can of worms when people blow it out of proportion and compare "mickey mouse infringments"that are part and parcel of the nature of the game to something like this that is far more significant,bear in mind the game went to extra time also.Compare like with like.


This was a new rule that the ref made a complete and utter b**ls of and didnt apply the correct protocol and there was plenty of time left for it to hughely affect the game.


Also the when the attention was tried to bring to him a mistake was made , the referee was un cooperative and told two cork selectors to go away ,the linesman was a Part of fitzmaurice,dingle manager kerrys backroom staff at senior ,with a second kerry linesman also present.So it wasnt just two Kerrymen.One had clear links and was with fitzmaurice just 3 days earlier in the Mcgrath cup Cork v Kerry.
As chriost ri said it was an ambush and clear rules state that shoulnt happen.

Now I dont do conspiracy therories and are not for every mistake to be replayed but ,there was clear as day ,a conflict of interest with fitymaurice backroom staff a key decison playmaker and the fact they wouldnt listen to chriost ri ,that with the wrong interepation of the rule book ,meant in terms of justice and fair play and in line what the gaa preach ,they had to give a replay.


From what I gather and credit due dingle did not seem too upset over a replay be given .Its not uncommon for a ref from the same county for example do a harty cup or corn mhuiri match with schools team with that same county involved,same in the football.

But he must not have any connection with the school,in this case,the linesman with clear connections to the manager of dingle should never have been involved offically in the game.Let him help fitzmaurice in the background with the school if he wants ,but to act as an offical in a key match ,no way can that take place.


Lessons hopefully will be learned ,and that shouldnt happen again.Justice was done when you take the overall picture in.

http://www.setanta.com/ie/black-card-controversy-mars-college-game/

Realt Dearg Sec

thinkstoomuch1 wrote: »

Complete nonense.keep it real.That scenario is completly different to last wednesdays .It only opens a can of worms when people blow it out of proportion and compare "mickey mouse infringments"that are part and parcel of the nature of the game to something like this that is far more significant,bear in mind the game went to extra time also.Compare like with like.


This was a new rule that the ref made a complete and utter b**ls of and didnt apply the correct protocol and there was plenty of time left for it to hughely affect the game.


Also the when the attention was tried to bring to him a mistake was made , the referee was un cooperative and told two cork selectors to go away ,the linesman was a Part of fitzmaurice,dingle manager kerrys backroom staff at senior ,with a second kerry linesman also present.So it wasnt just two Kerrymen.One had clear links and was with fitzmaurice just 3 days earlier in the Mcgrath cup Cork v Kerry.
As chriost ri said it was an ambush and clear rules state that shoulnt happen.

Now I dont do conspiracy therories and are not for every mistake to be replayed but ,there was clear as day ,a conflict of interest with fitymaurice backroom staff a key decison playmaker and the fact they wouldnt listen to chriost ri ,that with the wrong interepation of the rule book ,meant in terms of justice and fair play and in line what the gaa preach ,they had to give a replay.


From what I gather and credit due dingle did not seem too upset over a replay be given .Its not uncommon for a ref from the same county for example do a harty cup or corn mhuiri match with schools team with that same county involved,same in the football.

But he must not have any connection with the school,in this case,the linesman with clear connections to the manager of dingle should never have been involved offically in the game.Let him help fitzmaurice in the background with the school if he wants ,but to act as an offical in a key match ,no way can that take place.


Lessons hopefully will be learned ,and that shouldnt happen again.Justice was done when you take the overall picture in.

http://www.setanta.com/ie/black-card-controversy-mars-college-game/

All fair enough but if that's the issue, what is it to do with the black card?

Fr Tod Umptious

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

All fair enough but if that's the issue, what is it to do with the black card?

That's my point too, the mistake by the ref is not a result of the black card being a 'joke', its a result of poor officials.

And I am sure precident exists for a game at this level being replayed due to some inexplicable oversight by the officials

keane2097

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

That's my point too, the mistake by the ref is not a result of the black card being a 'joke', its a result of poor officials.

And I am sure precident exists for a game at this level being replayed due to some inexplicable oversight by the officials

Yeah, lol at the precedent idea, I seem to remember a fairly important hurling game being replayed because the ref played an inappropriate amount of time and the sky not falling in?

For those too young to remember it was Offaly vs Clare in the All Ireland semi-final.

mooonpie

zetecescort wrote: »

But sure the arguement could be made of not applying the rules if no free is awarded for a double hop, pickup off the ground or any other rule infringement. This replay opens a can of worms imo.

The difference here is that the ref failed to apply to correct penalty for his decision. I imagine if a player got 2 yellows and stayed on the pitch or straight red and was allowed to play on, the result could be appealed or a more absurd example, if a player received 1 yellow (no red) and the ref removed him from the game

Missing a double hop or a pick off the ground would be more similar to missing a score or allowing a score from a square ball ... and this becomes a referee's decision (which i believe can't be appealed), rather than incorrect enforcing of the rules (I'm sure there's better, more official terminology could be used)