All Ireland SHC Final (formerly SHC thread) - READ MOD NOTE POST #1

Mantis Toboggan

Am delighted he's playing, gives Waterford a half decent chance now.

fieldcow

namloc1980 wrote: »

They thought nothing of one player ripping the helmet off another. That just confirms they don't know the rules.

Again, you have to remember that they watched the incident in real time without the benefit of video replays. Virtually no one reacted to it at the time, including Kieron Kingston and Diarmuid O'Sullivan who were right beside the incident.

Of course, Gleeson deserved to be sent off and subsequently banned for the offence but to retrospectively apply a ban after he had avoided sanction would be completely inconsistent with the decision not to ban Tuohy and the disciplinary process as it stands.

Utopia Parkway

fieldcow wrote: »

The intention or severity of each incident is a moot point. Gleeson was cleared for the same reason as Tuohy; both referees indicated in their respective reports that they dealt with each incident at the time. The CCCC does not have the power to retrospectively apply punishment once a referee has made a decision.

The referee and linesman had a clear view of Sunday's incident and were happy with how they dealt with it. It's easy to be wise after the fact with multiple slow-motion replays from various angles.

That would make James Owens incompetent at best if he reported he saw the incident and was happy to leave it at that.

I imagine someone had a word in his ear as to what to put in his report.

zetecescort

just on Owens, presumably he also feels he was correct to send of Pat Horgan when it was Shane Kingston who hit Gleeson? How can he be left ref at this level again?

mountgomery burns

I'm assuming Mark Ellis has not been indigted, or Kingston. I assume those talking about a mockery of the rulebook and the integrity of the game being in question will have just as strong an opinion on those?

Lot of people saying just because its an all ireland final shouldn't matter the rules are the rules etc, but at the end of the day don't care if players are suspended for a league match. That is a double standard. Aussie is lucky, but there is a massive over reaction on both sides of the coin to the incident itself.

The_Kew_Tour

mountgomery burns wrote: »

Aussie is lucky, but there is a massive over reaction on both sides of the coin to the incident itself.

No they're not. At end of day its been brought up because a player is being let off quite simply because its a AI

Browney7

You couldn't make this up. If the ref was happy at the time why mention it in a report at all? Oh, it's because of a hoohaa on The Sunday Game. What an absolute farce of a disciplinary process.

Connolly who shoved the linesman and wasn't sent off got done after. Was that linesman nerve damaged and blissfully unaware he was shoved or did the officials adjudicate and as they thought it was a nothing incident left it out of the report?

Independent citing commissioner for every intercounty match was needed years ago

letowski

Delighted for Gleeson, the final would be a poorer place without him, I think all would agree. I think most would agree it was such a harmless incident too, it not like Meade was hurt in anyway at all.

That said the GAA will have to 100 percent have to revise the rule now. They are wide open sitting ducks next year if they don't, and there is an incident like this to happen. It will be the 'why does he get suspended when Gleeson didn't' argument every time going round in circles.

From the Bennett to the de Burca to the Gleeson incidents, there was no consistency nor transparency in their verdicts (not a first for the GAA for sure).

threeball

letowski wrote: »

Delighted for Gleeson, the final would be a poorer place without him, I think all would agree. I think most would agree it was such a harmless incident too, it not like Meade was hurt in anyway at all.

That said the GAA will have to 100 percent have to revise the rule now. They are wide open sitting ducks next year if they don't, and there is an incident like this to happen. It will be the 'why does he get suspended when Gleeson didn't' argument every time going round in circles.

From the Bennett to the de Burca to the Gleeson incidents, there was no consistency nor transparency in their verdicts (not a first for the GAA for sure).

I'm glad he's playing in the final also but he doesn't deserve too. It was far from harmless and at another angle could have done serious damage to Meade. You don't just sanction someone because they cause damage. The mere likelihood is more than enough reason.

Its another black mark against gaa discipline

Mucky_Tackies

Anyone got a link to a gif for the Gleeson helmet pull? All the talk and havent actually seen it.

Anonymou

fieldcow wrote: »

More likely that they saw the incident in real time and thought nothing of it.

Had the referee and his officials been looking elsewhere at the time, or otherwise missed the incident, Gleeson would be banned, just as Stephen Bennett was for his faceguard pull on Cahalane earlier in the Championship.

But thats the point I'm making, if they saw the incident and thought nothing of it then they don't know how to apply the rules in place!

jelutong

I'd imagine Gleesons fingers would have been very close to Meades eye at some point.

TheRiverman

jelutong wrote: »

I'd imagine Gleesons fingers would have been very close to Meades eye at some point.

I posted the following in the Waterford thread earlier,

Hopefully it never happens,but if some player gets serious eye damage or other facial damage then there will be a different attitude towards helmet interference.

awaywithyou

Gleeson will I think have to b careful in all Ireland... highly likely he will do something stupid he always does, he will get the line..... Such a shame a great talent has such a dirty streak in him and he doesn't even try to hide his actions.... All great players have a ruthless dirty streak but are cute... This guy is brain dead....

djPSB

Glad that Gleeson can play.

But one would have to question the transparency and governance of the GAA.

Disciplinary system really open to corruption.

C__MC

How can James Owens justify it though?

It's the clearest occurrence of the interference with the helmet I have seen

Brown envelop job

djPSB

C__MC wrote: »

How can James Owens justify it though?

It's the clearest occurrence of the interference with the helmet I have seen

Brown envelop job

One would wonder. System is really open to abuse and corruption.

tomwaterford

C__MC wrote: »

How can James Owens justify it though?

It's the clearest occurrence of the interference with the helmet I have seen

Brown envelop job

Boys are handing out serious allegations of corruption with little to nothing to back it up


I hope ozzy plays an absolute stormer in the final and this doesn't over shadow it/him

djPSB

letowski wrote: »

Delighted for Gleeson, the final would be a poorer place without him, I think all would agree. I think most would agree it was such a harmless incident too, it not like Meade was hurt in anyway at all.

That said the GAA will have to 100 percent have to revise the rule now. They are wide open sitting ducks next year if they don't, and there is an incident like this to happen. It will be the 'why does he get suspended when Gleeson didn't' argument every time going round in circles.

From the Bennett to the de Burca to the Gleeson incidents, there was no consistency nor transparency in their verdicts (not a first for the GAA for sure).

It's not the rule that's wrong. It's the application of it and the shady judiciary system which is wide open to abuse. The rules are very clear.

Diarmuid Connolly touches an official, 2 month ban. Brian Cody touches an official, no action taken.

Tadgh De Burca one game ban for interfering with the helmet. A few weeks later and Austin gets a way without punishment in a much more clear cut incident.

One would hope that it's just blatant incompetence by the GAA and that there isn't other factors at play.

munsterlegend

mountgomery burns wrote: »

I'm assuming Mark Ellis has not been indigted, or Kingston. I assume those talking about a mockery of the rulebook and the integrity of the game being in question will have just as strong an opinion on those?

Lot of people saying just because its an all ireland final shouldn't matter the rules are the rules etc, but at the end of the day don't care if players are suspended for a league match. That is a double standard. Aussie is lucky, but there is a massive over reaction on both sides of the coin to the incident itself.

Let's not forget Brick Walsh as well if you want to properly review the whole match. In fact his was worse than anything in the match given head high nature of it.

Anyway Austin can play and good luck to him. Waterford will need him and everyone else to have a good chance. Conor Gleeson did very well on Lehane who was not on his game and could have been on Canning maybe.

awaywithyou

djPSB wrote: »

It's not the rule that's wrong. It's the application of it and the shady judiciary system which is wide open to abuse. The rules are very clear.

Diarmuid Connolly touches an official, 2 month ban. Brian Cody touches an official, no action taken.

Tadgh De Burca one game ban for interfering with the helmet. A few weeks later and Austin gets a way without punishment in a much more clear cut incident.

One would hope that it's just blatant incompetence by the GAA and that there isn't other factors at play.

Don't forget Stephen bennett got a ban for pulling the helmet off cahalanne back in June

68deville

Well here is one way of looking at then, would you prefer to be Luke Meade
On the ground getting your helmet removed or Kevin Moran getting a full blown
Slap in the nuts that's doubled the man up!!?? Obvious that doesn't even count
As a noteworthy offence!

mountgomery burns

munsterlegend wrote: »

Let's not forget Brick Walsh as well if you want to properly review the whole match. In fact his was worse than anything in the match given head high nature of it.

Anyway Austin can play and good luck to him. Waterford will need him and everyone else to have a good chance. Conor Gleeson did very well on Lehane who was not on his game and could have been on Canning maybe.

Can you send me a video of that one because I don't recall it and haven't seen any mention of it since? Even if you can tell me when it happened that would suffice.

ForestFire

tomwaterford wrote: »

C__MC wrote: »

How can James Owens justify it though?

It's the clearest occurrence of the interference with the helmet I have seen

Brown envelop job

Boys are handing out serious allegations of corruption with little to nothing to back it up


I hope ozzy plays an absolute stormer in the final and this doesn't over shadow it/him

Agree, everyone should remember that despite all the media coverage and all the defence (both plausible and non) by fans on fourms, at the end of the day Austin was cleared by the GAA without any input from...

Austin
Waterford management or team
Waterford county board
Waterford fans

There was no appeal no court cases etc.

He had no case to answer because in the heat of the game the ref/officals interpreted in real time without replays that it was not deliberate .

Maybe he did not see it clearly, maybe the lineman saw if from a view that blocked Autins hands, we don't know, but that is the rules of the citing.

Again no one seems to allow comparison , but this is the exact same reason as the Touhy incident not being reviewed, ref saw it and determined not deliberate.

Does Autin need to take this as a lucky escape and a lesson for his overall behaviour, I hope so.

Does the whole system need a review...thats probable obvious.

I still think a there needs to be different levels open to the ref.

Yellow
Black (new)
Red

djPSB

Why would Owens get involved and say he was happy with how he officiated the incident. When he blatantly officiated the incident incorrectly.

If he was being totally transparent, couldn't he just have been honest and said he did not see the incident and then allow the CCCC apply the correct disciplinary action if required.

If he is happy with how he officiated the incident, he should never be allowed to referee a game again.

mickmackey1

68deville wrote: »

Well here is one way of looking at then, would you prefer to be Luke Meade
On the ground getting your helmet removed or Kevin Moran getting a full blown
Slap in the nuts that's doubled the man up!!?? Obvious that doesn't even count
As a noteworthy offence!

The purpose of the rule has more to do with how easy it is to commit a helmet offence, as opposed to how serious the offence actually is. Gleeson is very fortunate no doubt, he's under more pressure than ever now to produce a blinder in the final.

munsterlegend

mountgomery burns wrote: »

Can you send me a video of that one because I don't recall it and haven't seen any mention of it since? Even if you can tell me when it happened that would suffice.

It was on Bill Cooper around the 38-39 minute mark.

mountgomery burns

munsterlegend wrote: »

It was on Bill Cooper around the 38-39 minute mark.

Just seen it there after Cooper fouls Barron. Not even going to discuss that to be honest, not even related to a red card.

munsterlegend

mountgomery burns wrote: »

Just seen it there after Cooper fouls Barron. Not even going to discuss that to be honest, not even related to a red card.

Not surprising given your aversion to discussing Waterford incidents.

A shoulder to Coopers head who had to receive treatment. He might not have meant it but was reckless. You have no problem discussing Ellis flicking a foot out and not even knocking the lad over.

Bluemallon

elefant wrote: »

The comparisons between the Tuohy and Austin Gleeson incidents are disingenuous in the extreme. Is anybody apart from Waterford fans, who might be naturally clouded in their judgment over this, seriously claiming to think the intention of interfering with the helmet is as blatantly obvious in both of those instances?

I'm sure just about every GAA fan in the country would love to see Gleeson vs. Canning battle it out in an All-Ireland final, but using Tuohy's clearing as some kind of defence of Gleeson is absolutely facile. Gleeson was lying on top of a player with the ball out of play, and tore his helmet off by the face guard. It's as stone-wall a red card as you could imagine.

As a Waterford fan I cannot condone the stupidity of Aussie , but the comparison with Touhy is correct both helmets were pulled off from underneath even with the hindsight of slowmotion you have misinterpeted the incident. Red cards were not given so lets get on with looking forward to seeing both players in the final.