Lee Keegan's red card overturned

Nidgeweasel

Couldn't see this anywhere. I suppose it's a Mayo player so could be in the Mayo thread but thought this was more of a general debate point.

I'm not sure where I stand on him being cleared to play. On one side I'm happy because he's a brilliant footballer and seems a good sort and you'd hate any young fella to miss a game like that, the second is that his 'kick' was just a petulant swing of the boot BUT it was a strike and by the letter of the law should have walked and missed the game on Saturday.

While it's good the CHC have shown a bit of common sense the issue is now if any other borderline cases occur then there's a precedent because of Keegan. A case of "argha sure it's not that hard of a punch, he only clipped him/ I know he threw a punch but he missed him" situation. I'm being deliberately facetious with that example but it's an interesting point nonetheless.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Bad decision which really undermines referees in general.

Keegan kicked an opponent.It may not have been much but he kicked an opponent which is a red card offence and it should have been upheld.

Whats the point in having a rule book when the referee applies the rules his decision is then considered to be incorrect.

Blackjack

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Bad decision which really undermines referees in general.

Keegan kicked an opponent.It may not have been much but he kicked an opponent which is a red card offence and it should have been upheld.

Whats the point in having a rule book when the referee applies the rules his decision is then considered to be incorrect.

If the rules were to have been applied then Buckley would have been sent off too for the dig in the ribs to Keegan after the whistle had gone.

Nidgeweasel

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Bad decision which really undermines referees in general.

Keegan kicked an opponent.It may not have been much but he kicked an opponent which is a red card offence and it should have been upheld.

Whats the point in having a rule book when the referee applies the rules his decision is then considered to be incorrect.

Is a fair point too. It's undermined the referees who have a hard enough time.

Harry Angstrom

The ref brought all this controversy on himself. It was an innocuous enough incident and a yellow card would have sufficed. Common sense finally prevails.

Podge83

The Authority of referees is slowly being eroded by these spineless decisions by the CCCC or whoever makes them these days.

The GAA are trying to stop disrespect towards officials. The sign this sends out is - hassle the Ref, he's being too strict and we will overturn it after - give him (the ref) hassle as you need this player now, not next game!!.

Look, he kicked out. The rule is clear - not sure of the exact wording, but when read this was a sending off according to the rules. Call it harsh, and maybe it is, but it is the RULE!!!

This Referee applied the rule correctly and is now made to look silly - holy sh1t, the GAA needs referees - keep sending this sign out and they will turn away.

Staplor

So the rule should be changed to include the word "clatter" for a red card, attempting to "clatter" is only a yellow.

Podge83

Blackjack wrote: »

If the rules were to have been applied then Buckley would have been sent off too for the dig in the ribs to Keegan after the whistle had gone.

If the Officials saw it!

Past30Now

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Bad decision which really undermines referees in general.

Keegan kicked an opponent.It may not have been much but he kicked an opponent which is a red card offence and it should have been upheld.

Whats the point in having a rule book when the referee applies the rules his decision is then considered to be incorrect.

Who'd be a referee. Keegan clearly attempted to kick his opponent.The referee spotted it and sent him off, correctly in my opinion,and now has his correct decision overturned by committee.

I'm delighted for Keegan as you don't want to see players missing big occasions, and he's one of the best in the country, but it's wrong to overturn a decision made on the field of play that isn't a blatant error.

yop

According to what I read it was the lineman who highlighted the issue, the same ref as next saturday.
The ref then wrote it "wrong" in the report and the way he wrote it meant it didnt "fit" into the rules hence why it was overturned.
One part of me says it wasn't a red, yet for kicking out he still has to be sent off.
Overturning it is just mad stuff, refs are under enough pressure already.
Delighted he will be there on Saturday though.

Molester Stallone II

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

The ref brought all this controversy on himself. It was an innocuous enough incident and a yellow card would have sufficed. Common sense finally prevails.

No.it wasn't....and no, it didn't

Hammer Archer

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

The ref brought all this controversy on himself. It was an innocuous enough incident and a yellow card would have sufficed. Common sense finally prevails.

What part of the rules state that Keegan's kick wasn't a red card? Referees are there to apply the rules of the game as set out by the GAA. Coldrick did this on Sunday and yet he has been undermined by the CCCC.
Yet at the same time, you will often have incidents that were blatant red cards but were given only yellows and the GAA deem the issue to have been 'dealt with by the referee'. And you will get red cards upheld which were never red cards in the first place.
The appeals system and the disciplinary system as a whole is a complete joke.

Alvin Holler

yop wrote: »

According to what I read it was the lineman who highlighted the issue, the same ref as next saturday.
The ref then wrote it "wrong" in the report and the way he wrote it meant it didnt "fit" into the rules hence why it was overturned.
One part of me says it wasn't a red, yet for kicking out he still has to be sent off.
Overturning it is just mad stuff, refs are under enough pressure already.
Delighted he will be there on Saturday though.

Yeah, from the irish times...

"Referee David Coldrick reported the player for “kicking with minimal force” Kerry’s Johnny Buckley but Mayo were able to demonstrate through video evidence that the kick had not connected and therefore Keegan should have been reported for “attempting to kick with minimal force”."

Awful decision really, surely any referee should just report a player for attempting to kick?

corny

Podge83 wrote: »

The Authority of referees is slowly being eroded by these spineless decisions by the CCCC or whoever makes them these days.

The GAA are trying to stop disrespect towards officials. The sign this sends out is - hassle the Ref, he's being too strict and we will overturn it after - give him (the ref) hassle as you need this player now, not next game!!.

Look, he kicked out. The rule is clear - not sure of the exact wording, but when read this was a sending off according to the rules. Call it harsh, and maybe it is, but it is the RULE!!!

This Referee applied the rule correctly and is now made to look silly - holy sh1t, the GAA needs referees - keep sending this sign out and they will turn away.

See i have a problem with this blind obedience to some words written on paper. For me the rules of the game are a template for a referee to create a good game of football. They really shouldn't be doctrine.

I agree that the GAA are effectively sending out conflicting messages with this decision though and it completely undermines the referee. The funny thing is Colderick has probably been instructed to apply the rules blindly.

yop

Alvin Holler wrote: »

Yeah, from the irish times...

"Referee David Coldrick reported the player for “kicking with minimal force” Kerry’s Johnny Buckley but Mayo were able to demonstrate through video evidence that the kick had not connected and therefore Keegan should have been reported for “attempting to kick with minimal force”."

Awful decision really, surely any referee should just report a player for attempting to kick?

If its gone down to a level of wording now then there will always be a loop hole.

Molester Stallone II

Alvin Holler wrote: »

Yeah, from the irish times...

"Referee David Coldrick reported the player for “kicking with minimal force” Kerry’s Johnny Buckley but Mayo were able to demonstrate through video evidence that the kick had not connected and therefore Keegan should have been reported for “attempting to kick with minimal force”."

Awful decision really, surely any referee should just report a player for attempting to kick?

But then if he makes contact with the kick and it can be shown in video evidence, is the referees decision not again open to challenge?

keane2097

I'm a bit disturbed by this emerging narrative that Buckley punched Keegan in the ribs. He clearly - clearly - punched the ball.

Podge83

corny wrote: »

See i have a problem with this blind obedience to some words written on paper. For me the rules of the game are a template for a referee to create a good game of football. They really shouldn't be doctrine.

I agree that the GAA are effectively sending out conflicting messages with this decision though and it completely undermines the referee. The funny thing is Colderick has probably been instructed to apply the rules blindly.

I agree with this to an extent, but attempting to kick should be a red card. Kicking an opponent is disrepectful, violent, petulent etc and has no part in the game - this message needs to be sent out to players

Harry Angstrom

Hammer Archer wrote: »

What part of the rules state that Keegan's kick wasn't a red card? Referees are there to apply the rules of the game as set out by the GAA. Coldrick did this on Sunday and yet he has been undermined by the CCCC.
Yet at the same time, you will often have incidents that were blatant red cards but were given only yellows and the GAA deem the issue to have been 'dealt with by the referee'. And you will get red cards upheld which were never red cards in the first place.
The appeals system and the disciplinary system as a whole is a complete joke.

When I see a player like Aaron Findon staying on the pitch after his disgraceful behaviour in the Armagh/Donegal match, it kinda puts Lee Keegan's indiscretion into context. As I said, common sense has prevailed.

Alvin Holler

Molester Stallone II wrote: »

But then if he makes contact with the kick and it can be shown in video evidence, is the referees decision not again open to challenge?

maybe, you'd be into a bit of a legal argument then. My point would be that to kick you have to attempt to kick!

it's pretty ridiculous anyway.

irishgeo

keane2097 wrote:

I'm a bit disturbed by this emerging narrative that Buckley punched Keegan in the ribs. He clearly - clearly - punched the ball.

But your not allowed to that either. It's an open hand that you tackle with.

keane2097

irishgeo wrote: »

But your not allowed to that either. It's an open hand that you tackle with.

Are we agreed that Keegan wasn't punched in the ribs or are we just talking about something else?

yop

keane2097 wrote: »

Are we agreed that Keegan wasn't punched in the ribs or are we just talking about something else?

He wasn't punched in the ribs. Keegans kick didn't connect. Both should/could have been reds for the intention of the action.

keane2097

yop wrote: »

He wasn't punched in the ribs. Keegans kick didn't connect. Both should/could have been reds for the intention of the action.

I'm glad we're agreed there was no punch to the ribs, it seems to be taken as fact in several places which is bizarre.

robbiezero

corny wrote: »

See i have a problem with this blind obedience to some words written on paper. For me the rules of the game are a template for a referee to create a good game of football. They really shouldn't be doctrine.

I agree that the GAA are effectively sending out conflicting messages with this decision though and it completely undermines the referee. The funny thing is Colderick has probably been instructed to apply the rules blindly.

I am not sure it does undermine the referee. Maybe he or the linesman thought they saw a kick and reported it as such.

cantwbr1

corny wrote: »

See i have a problem with this blind obedience to some words written on paper. For me the rules of the game are a template for a referee to create a good game of football. They really shouldn't be doctrine.

I agree that the GAA are effectively sending out conflicting messages with this decision though and it completely undermines the referee. The funny thing is Colderick has probably been instructed to apply the rules blindly.

That is not the Refs job. The Refs job is to implement the rules as they are written. The only ones who create a good gane of football are the players

yop

keane2097 wrote: »

I'm glad we're agreed there was no punch to the ribs, it seems to be taken as fact in several places which is bizarre.

Definitely no punch.
The whole thing is turning into an incredible farce from the red that was a red that was a yellow that was a red that wasn't a red, to blacks which weren't given that could have or should have been and then playing the game in Limerick when it should have been in Croker when more games should have be played outside of Croker, to the yanks invading Croker to the yank that couldn't get Croker.
All in all its not done the GAA/CCC etc any favors this year, the decisions made in 2014 won't go down well.

What is more sickening is that what was the best game of the Championship and again could turn out to be the same next Saturday is been overshadowed by all of this circus. Time to move on now and look forward to the match.
Its on where its on and reds have been overturned, some are happy others aren't.

Brusna

Nidgeweasel wrote: »

While it's good the CHC have shown a bit of common sense the issue is now if any other borderline cases occur then there's a precedent because of Keegan.

The precedent was set in 2011 when Diarmuid Connolly had his red card in the semi final against Donegal rescinded which allowed him to play in the final.

elefant

I don't have too much of issue with this really.

I would prefer, though, if the appeals board could just straight out say that, while the red card was the correct decision by the referee, the offence wasn't severe enough to warrant a ban.
By the rules Keegan was deservedly red carded, but a ban for that would have been extremely tough.

Whatever the reasoning (and that bit about incorrect wording in the report is a bit bizarre!) I think the fairest thing has been done.

Here's to hoping for another cracker on Saturday.

homerjay2005

keane2097 wrote: »

I'm a bit disturbed by this emerging narrative that Buckley punched Keegan in the ribs. He clearly - clearly - punched the ball.

you are trying to reason with Mayo fans, its something that just is not possible when it comes to things like this. they love to blame somebody, its what they do.

had Keegan not been able to play, you can be sure they'd be booing Buckley and Walsh left right and center the next day, along with bullying the ref like they did during the Minor game the last day also.

had this been a Kerry player that got off on a technicality, they'd be war right now.

Shelflife

I think that a fair outcome has been arrived at but in a bizarre way. The ref has been hung out to dry in a most unfair way.
McColdrick called it correctly on Sunday, it was a red card offense but I'd say even the ref sensed that it was harsh, a correct call but harsh.
For me the red card was punishment enough and it's clear that the Committe felt the same. But instead of backing the ref and saying that he was correct in issueing the red card and then subsequently standing up and saying that they felt that it didn't warrant any more of a punishment , they weaselled their way out if it by hiding behind a nuance in a report.
What they are saying is that mcColdrick screwed up the report. Thus hanging him out to dry.

As a ref myself in another code, it's clear the effort that these refs put in to reach the top level, it's a hard enough job without being left isolated by the organisation you represent.

It's not going to do the associations ref recruitment drive any good, and it won't do the morale of the top refs any goud either.

robbiezero

Shelflife wrote: »

I think that a fair outcome has been arrived at but in a bizarre way. The ref has been hung out to dry in a most unfair way.
McColdrick called it correctly on Sunday, it was a red card offense but I'd say even the ref sensed that it was harsh, a correct call but harsh.
For me the red card was punishment enough and it's clear that the Committe felt the same. But instead of backing the ref and saying that he was correct in issueing the red card and then subsequently standing up and saying that they felt that it didn't warrant any more of a punishment , they weaselled their way out if it by hiding behind a nuance in a report.
What they are saying is that mcColdrick screwed up the report. Thus hanging him out to dry.

As a ref myself in another code, it's clear the effort that these refs put in to reach the top level, it's a hard enough job without being left isolated by the organisation you represent.

It's not going to do the associations ref recruitment drive any good, and it won't do the morale of the top refs any goud either.

Not necessarily. Maybe he or the linesman didn't see the incident correctly.

Stoner

I'd like highlight again, before the kick or attempted kick the ref had ample opportunity to blow the whistle and move the ball forward 13M for Mayo to aptly punish the Kerry players for their part in drawing the reaction from Keegan.

At the end of the day their actions went 100% unpunished the ball was out of play and it was a Mayo free, Buckley knew exactly what he was at, he wanted a reaction, slow things up or turn it into a 50 50 situation.

Blow it up move the play on I guarantee you Keegan would have just ran up the field with the ball and there would have been no red card and Buckley would have been punished for the transgression.

Brusna

Shelflife wrote: »

But instead of backing the ref and saying that he was correct in issueing the red card and then subsequently standing up and saying that they felt that it didn't warrant any more of a punishment

Can they do that? Could they have upheld the red card but rescinded the one game ban?

homerjay2005

thats o Connor, Connolly and Keegan now all have their red cards rescinded, allowing them to play against Kerry in a major game.

meanwhile, countless kerry players have been given the trial by media and banned retrospectively over the past decade, while similar incidents have went unpunished all over the country, even this summer.

you can be sure if that was Crowley or Maher kicking out last sunday, it wouldnt have been rescinded.

homewardbound11

keane2097 wrote: »

I'm a bit disturbed by this emerging narrative that Buckley punched Keegan in the ribs. He clearly - clearly - punched the ball.

First. Buckley fisted the ball after the ref had blown up. You know and I know what Buckley was doing. Buckley was trying to aggrivate the player. He succeeded and Keegan got sent off.

Trying to de-possess a player of a ball would involve a downward punch. Buckley clearly showed an action with intent. All be it the ball was in between his closed fist and Keegan's torso.

I wouldn't be annoyed by any of this but Donnacha Walsh has a lot to answer.

Hibbeler

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

When I see a player like Aaron Findon staying on the pitch after his disgraceful behaviour in the Armagh/Donegal match, it kinda puts Lee Keegan's indiscretion into context. As I said, common sense has prevailed.

Bringing up something like this (and the talk on here about the buckley case also) is just plain whataboutery in my opinion and is not really relevant to the case at hand. Different game, different ref, different interpretation of rules etc. Such is sport and life.

I know we all want referees to be as consistent as possible but at the end of the day they are human same as the rest of us and just as liable to make mistakes. It does not help them however to have major (game-changing) decisions such as the Lee Keegan case (which was a correct decision imo) overturned, it undermines the referees supposed authority

elefant

homerjay2005 wrote: »

you are trying to reason with Mayo fans, its something that just is not possible when it comes to things like this. they love to blame somebody, its what they do.

had Keegan not been able to play, you can be sure they'd be booing Buckley and Walsh left right and center the next day, along with bullying the ref like they did during the Minor game the last day also.

had this been a Kerry player that got off on a technicality, they'd be war right now.

homerjay2005 wrote: »

thats o Connor, Connolly and Keegan now all have their red cards rescinded, allowing them to play against Kerry in a major game.

meanwhile, countless kerry players have been given the trial by media and banned retrospectively over the past decade, while similar incidents have went unpunished all over the country, even this summer.

Is it Mayo fans you have an issue with then? Or just a persecution complex?

I seriously doubt there's some sort of conspiracy within the GAA to deny Kerry All-Ireland championships. And if there is they've been doing a terrible job :pac:

Nippledragon

The GAA really need to adopt the rugby referee model, captain only allowed to speak to ref. GAA is getting more and more like soccer, with players surrounding refs in order to sway decisions their way, not to mention some of the play-acting players do: grabbing faces and falling to the ground like a hape of sh!te.

Red card should never have been issued to keegan, as Kerry players were preventing him from playing the ball quickly.

Players should have to retreat like rugby when a foul is awarded or it is moved closer to goal. It would cut out the nonsense.

Why not let the ref utilise video evidence to resolve incidents like this?

flasher0030

homerjay2005 wrote: »

thats o Connor, Connolly and Keegan now all have their red cards rescinded, allowing them to play against Kerry in a major game.

meanwhile, countless kerry players have been given the trial by media and banned retrospectively over the past decade, while similar incidents have went unpunished all over the country, even this summer.

you can be sure if that was Crowley or Maher kicking out last sunday, it wouldnt have been rescinded.

Will someone give the dummy back to this baby please.

yop

homerjay2005 wrote: »

you are trying to reason with Mayo fans, its something that just is not possible when it comes to things like this. they love to blame somebody, its what they do.

had Keegan not been able to play, you can be sure they'd be booing Buckley and Walsh left right and center the next day, along with bullying the ref like they did during the Minor game the last day also.

had this been a Kerry player that got off on a technicality, they'd be war right now.

Awww, someone not feeling loved? If you read the posts then it would make your post even more laughable. :rolleyes:

DoctaDee

Venue change to Limerick and now a red card overturned - us Mods are working overtime! - make the job a little easier will ya by attacking the post and not the poster. Thanks

TCDStudent1

Nippledragon wrote: »

The GAA really need to adopt the rugby referee model, captain only allowed to speak to ref. GAA is getting more and more like soccer, with players surrounding refs in order to sway decisions their way, not to mention some of the play-acting players do: grabbing faces and falling to the ground like a hape of sh!te.

Red card should never have been issued to keegan, as Kerry players were preventing him from playing the ball quickly.

Players should have to retreat like rugby when a foul is awarded or it is moved closer to goal. It would cut out the nonsense.

Why not let the ref utilise video evidence to resolve incidents like this?

But that cannot or should not be considered as justification for Keegan to kick out in the way he did.

If I was referee, I would have given a yellow. I thought it was a yellow at the time and was surprised to see a red. However, the person at fault for receiving a red card was Lee Keegan - he was the one who kicked out. It was not the fault of the referee or the Kerry players. The 1 person to blame for Lee Keegan being sent off was Lee Keegan.

Hammer Archer

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

When I see a player like Aaron Findon staying on the pitch after his disgraceful behaviour in the Armagh/Donegal match, it kinda puts Lee Keegan's indiscretion into context. As I said, common sense has prevailed.

Exactly what do incidents in another game have to do with what happened last weekend? By your reasoning, a player can do pretty much anything they want to another player and say something like "well Tyrone and Dublin players got away with much worse back in Omagh in the mid 2000s so I should get off".
Once again, what's your reasoning behind thinking it was correct to rescind the red card beyond vaguely saying "common sense has prevailed".

Shelflife

TCDStudent1 wrote: »

But that cannot or should not be considered as justification for Keegan to kick out in the way he did.

If I was referee, I would have given a yellow. I thought it was a yellow at the time and was surprised to see a red. However, the person at fault for receiving a red card was Lee Keegan - he was the one who kicked out. It was not the fault of the referee or the Kerry players. The 1 person to blame for Lee Keegan being sent off was Lee Keegan.

I agree with you 100%, however if the ref had handled these delaying tactics with a firmer hand then the situation wouldnt have happened. Its a game management issue and for me the team trying to legally play the ball quickly should be allowed to do so.

That said Keegan is 100% responsible for his actions.

corny

Podge83 wrote: »

I agree with this to an extent, but attempting to kick should be a red card. Kicking an opponent is disrepectful, violent, petulent etc and has no part in the game - this message needs to be sent out to players

Again i have a problem with this. Thats an hysterical overreaction to what happened. You're drawing a line between what Keegan did and maliciously kicking a player. He kicked thin air. The distinction (common sense) has to be made here. He was provoked and he responded with a gesture (i'd call it that and not a kick tbh). The referee should pull Keegan and a couple of the Kerry players aside and say act like children again and you can all leave the field. Really thats all the situation demanded because no one was injured, no one died, children weren't scarred by what they saw.I don't see why discretion has to be removed even if you do want to send a message.

On a wider note, personally i find the actions of the Kerry players looking for a reaction far more objectionable and are normally the root cause of these acts of frustration.

Mr. Incognito

I am disappointed that at such a high profile appeal the GAA didn't back the ref. It's going to be in the refs minds for the rest of the year that they will be hung out to dry for issuing a red card.

There is no such thing as "common sense" prevailing, or "the spirit of the law". There is the law.

The ref sent a player off, in accordance with the rules. The time for common sense was in the refs hands to apply the rule. When it was applied then the GAA should back the ref 110%.

Upholding this terrible appeal only encourages other counties to appeal over and over. The system is flawed. Cork have been abusing it for years in particular.

Both sanctions carry the same offence. It's like saying I'll plead guilty to A to get off B. That's not in accordance with "the spirit of the law" either is it. If you are accepting that you commited an offence that carries the same offence I have no idea why you should not be sanctioned in accordance with that offence.

The sending off was harsh. But once applied it should not, unless utterly out of order be lifted.

I am very very afraid for inter county referees if this is the way they are undermined. The GAA are hypocritical to be pushing a respect for referees campaign when they won't even support them in the basic function of their job.

This is bad for everyone.

__________________

homerjay2005

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

I am very very afraid for inter county referees if this is the way they are undermined.

my understanding is the GAA didnt undermine the ref, but the wording in the report was wrong and this is what Mayo appealed.

he gets off on a technicality. its a bit like the gardai arresting a man, but the charges are thrown out because the warrant was out of date.

keeponhurling

Aaron Findon didn't kick or punch anyone though

ColeTrain

homerjay2005 wrote: »

you are trying to reason with Mayo fans, its something that just is not possible when it comes to things like this. they love to blame somebody, its what they do.

had Keegan not been able to play, you can be sure they'd be booing Buckley and Walsh left right and center the next day, along with bullying the ref like they did during the Minor game the last day also.

had this been a Kerry player that got off on a technicality, they'd be war right now.

fleck

This is not the first time a player has been cleared based on the referee's wording of "attempted striking" versus "striking" (O'Leary for Cork in a Munster final about 5 years ago ).
Given that fact, is it not possible that the ref realises he was a bit harsh sending off the player and is purposely giving the country grounds for appeal?