Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Private profiles - please note that profiles marked as private will soon be public. This will facilitate moderation so mods can view users' warning histories. All of your posts across the site will appear on your profile page (including PI, RI). Groups posts will remain private except to users who have access to the same Groups as you. Thread here
Some important site news, please read here. Thanks!

The Integrity of the Sport.

  • 14-08-2017 4:04pm
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,571 0byme75341jo28


    What is it with some GAA people and their complete disregard for the rules, the breaking of them, and the subsequent punishments? All you see online today is people defending the Gleesons and saying what a disgrace it would be if two amateur athletes are denied their big day and are suspended for the final. Similar happened after the Connolly incident earlier in the year.

    They broke the rules, there are punishments in place for people who do so, to suggest that they should bend these for those who do so simply because they are amateur sportspeople undermines the integrity of the sport as a whole.

    These rules are not "nonsense". They're there to prevent injury, discourage foul play, and promote respect for officials. Understandably frustrating for supporters of the affected teams, but it's completely disingenuous to say they are "nonsense" and should result in no punishment.

    The integrity of the sport is at stake if these incidents go unpunished!


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,064 ✭✭✭ MarcusP12


    I agree with the sentiment of your post and I've been banging on for years (not here btw) about what a joke the discipline system in the GAA is in terms of bans sticking. Seems to be very difficult to make one stick and you always hear the same old rubbish about it being a shame for great players to miss out on whatever match with all the time they put into the game with nothing in return (which is non-sense and a whole other story).

    The sad thing is I would be surprised if this view is given much support here but who knows. I was listening to a pod cast this morning about the incident with Gleeson and the argument was made that it should only be a red if there was "aggression" involved (as opposed to intent only). Such non-sense. They also mentioned about the strike off the ball....was only a "tap" apparently.

    I also read an article by Dick Clerkin in the indo talking about how they got into the face of Kerry and how he put a right hook on Galvin that McGregor would be proud of. The tone of the article I found pretty distasteful in terms of glorifying the physicality which crosses a line. I know most counties have it in their armory which is a sad reflection of the game and a direct result of the lack of consequence of this tactic.

    I'm all for the physicality in both codes and have played both to a decent level all be it only up to minor but surely its possible to maintain physicality without digging lads off the ball or striking lads with intent or pulling helmets off. That's just thuggish behavior and should result in bans. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time as they say....if there's a problem with the rule which is resulting in lads being sent off then maybe have a look at that (can't really think of any to be honest) but if you know an action will result in a sending off then the fault at that time is on the player.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,832 ✭✭✭ Poor_old_gill


    MarcusP12 wrote: »
    I agree with the sentiment of your post and I've been banging on for years (not here btw) about what a joke the discipline system in the GAA is in terms of bans sticking. Seems to be very difficult to make one stick and you always hear the same old rubbish about it being a shame for great players to miss out on whatever match with all the time they put into the game with nothing in return (which is non-sense and a whole other story).

    The sad thing is I would be surprised if this view is given much support here but who knows. I was listening to a pod cast this morning about the incident with Gleeson and the argument was made that it should only be a red if there was "aggression" involved (as opposed to intent only). Such non-sense. They also mentioned about the strike off the ball....was only a "tap" apparently.

    I also read an article by Dick Clerkin in the indo talking about how they got into the face of Kerry and how he put a right hook on Galvin that McGregor would be proud of. The tone of the article I found pretty distasteful in terms of glorifying the physicality which crosses a line. I know most counties have it in their armory which is a sad reflection of the game and a direct result of the lack of consequence of this tactic.

    I'm all for the physicality in both codes and have played both to a decent level all be it only up to minor but surely its possible to maintain physicality without digging lads off the ball or striking lads with intent or pulling helmets off. That's just thuggish behavior and should result in bans. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time as they say....if there's a problem with the rule which is resulting in lads being sent off then maybe have a look at that (can't really think of any to be honest) but if you know an action will result in a sending off then the fault at that time is on the player.

    Dick Clerkin had to throw right hooks- he had nothing to offer ability wise


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,192 ✭✭✭✭ super_furry


    You either have rules and enforce them or you don't. All this 'ah shure, he's a good lad, you can't make him miss a final' stuff is laughable. Just as bad is the criticism that the Sunday Game pundits get for pointing out incidents that happen during games. It's their job to talk about these things.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,064 ✭✭✭ MarcusP12


    You either have rules and enforce them or you don't. All this 'ah shure, he's a good lad, you can't make him miss a final' stuff is laughable. Just as bad is the criticism that the Sunday Game pundits get for pointing out incidents that happen during games. It's their job to talk about these things.

    Yeah I agree, it does a huge disservice to the game to dismiss red card incidences as just part of the game for example but its a view that's a little too popular for my liking (not that that matters of course!).

    They should just rip the rule book up and let the lads just go at it if they're not going to play by the rules and accept punishments where there is no case of mistaken identity or a blatant error by the ref!


  • Registered Users Posts: 29,346 homerjay2005


    people forge these are amateur sportsmen that devote their entire year to playing in an all ireland final.

    people seem to forget that. thankfully, it looks like the all ireland final will have the current hurler of the year in it, would have been a disaster if he was suspended for what is an awful rule.

    time for the GAA to make it a black card or yellow card offence.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 27,192 ✭✭✭✭ super_furry


    people forget these are amateur sportsmen that devote their entire year to playing in an all ireland final.

    No-one forgets that, but just because players don't get paid it doesn't mean that rules should be ignored if one of them is in danger of missing a big game. Either have the rules and enforce them across the board, or scrap the rules.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,571 Liam Agreeable Something


    people forge these are amateur sportsmen that devote their entire year to playing in an all ireland final.

    people seem to forget that. thankfully, it looks like the all ireland final will have the current hurler of the year in it, would have been a disaster if he was suspended for what is an awful rule.

    time for the GAA to make it a black card or yellow card offence.

    Why is it an awful rule? Both sets of players play with the understanding that interfering with the helmet of another player results in a red card. The helmets are compulsory now to prevent head and brain injury for every competitor, no one has the right to remove that vital safety equipment in a forceful manner. That's before you consider the danger the aggressive pulling off of a helmet poses to the neck/ears of the fouled player.

    There are amateur sportspeople all over the world who aren't allowed compete or become disqualified due to some apparently innocuous rule. Did an Irish fella in the Paralympics not get disqualified a few years ago because his toe went outside the line in some track event? Why was there no uproar within the athletics then? Simple, because a lot of people within the GAA want to have their cake and eat it. They want to have the sport taken seriously and the rules to be respected, but at the same time want to have the "ah sure they're only amateur athletes" excuse when something controversial happens. It's nonsense and takes away from the integrity of the games.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,529 ✭✭✭ howiya


    people forge these are amateur sportsmen that devote their entire year to playing in an all ireland final.

    people seem to forget that. thankfully, it looks like the all ireland final will have the current hurler of the year in it, would have been a disaster if he was suspended for what is an awful rule.

    time for the GAA to make it a black card or yellow card offence.

    So if you're playing a semi final you should get a free pass in case you might miss the final?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,724 ✭✭✭ nice_guy80


    rules are rules
    once you cross the white line to play you abide by the rules or face the consequences


  • Registered Users Posts: 576 ✭✭✭ ifah


    people forge these are amateur sportsmen that devote their entire year to playing in an all ireland final.

    people seem to forget that. thankfully, it looks like the all ireland final will have the current hurler of the year in it, would have been a disaster if he was suspended for what is an awful rule.

    time for the GAA to make it a black card or yellow card offence.

    You want to bring a black card into hurling for this ? yeah - that'll work.

    As for faceguard offences - I'd much prefer to get struck with a hurl or fist any day than have the face guard ripped off. It's exactly like a whiplash - your neck muscles will never be strong enough to counter the force of someone pulling you around by the helmet/facemask.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,064 ✭✭✭ MarcusP12


    people forge these are amateur sportsmen that devote their entire year to playing in an all ireland final.

    people seem to forget that. thankfully, it looks like the all ireland final will have the current hurler of the year in it, would have been a disaster if he was suspended for what is an awful rule.

    time for the GAA to make it a black card or yellow card offence.

    How would it have been a disaster for the final? He knew the consequences of ripping the helmet off the lad so why the crying over spilt milk? Don't necessarily disagree that its a harsh red card but the rule is the rule and he knew that.

    People don't forget that these lads are amatures devoting their year to achieving the highest honours in the game because its drummed into us everytime there's a similar issue. I admire all these lads who play at this level but I don't subscribe to this whole notion that they make all these sacrifices with their time with no reward. That's nonsense. They may not get physically paid for their participation (player grant aside) but they certainly do well in other areas at every level.

    Back in the day they walked into jobs in the bank for example and still do. When I was growing up, a couple of legends of the great Kerry team were bank managers in the town. I walked into the AIB in Killarney recently one day and who was there but James O'Donogue doing a meet and greet....The gooch and the star are also in the banks I think and Sean Og O'Halpin was regularly rolled out by Ulster bank....its good for the PR....I've seen it first hand with one particular high profile footballer who started around the same time as me...people would just fall over themselves to give him attention and feed off his celebrity (really used to annoy me as you wouldn't get the time of day off half them otherwise) and he's done very very well for himself since. Not suggesting that he's not competent or capable but it certainly hasn't harmed his career. Plus he used to get plenty of time off to facilitate his football commitment here and abroad.

    I think, there was even talk of an initiative by the GAA to help lads who were out of work during the recession to keep them in the country to play.

    If you wanted, you could even suggest that lads who play at a low level at their local club tend to be well known in their community and i'm sure some do very well with the ladies on account of their local celebrity status at the local night club! Everyone knows you if you're on the local team of a small community. I'm sure they get looked after for jobs as well.

    Such is the status of the GAA in irish society, all else being equal, a guy with an intercounty career will defo have the edge on someone else in their career. Now to be fair, employers may assume certain traits like leadership, team building and work ethic as being a side effect of their involvement and also, its good for a company's profile with clients etc to have a well known GAA star in their ranks.

    I don't begrudge the lads (or ladies) these benefits at all for the time they put into the sport but I wish people would just call it as it is rather than play the poor them and all the time they put into the sport for no financial gain thing all the time. No one forces them to play and I've no doubt that they get great enjoyment from it in many ways.....


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭ Miley Byrne


    Of course Austin Gleeson should miss out on the final. It was as blatant a red card as you are ever likely to see(under the current rules). The disciplinary system in the GAA is just too casual and not rigid enough. The more high profile the incident, then the more stakeholders get involved to the point that the original incident is forgotten about and all anyone hears about is what a nice fella he is and wouldn't it be a shame if he missed out on the biggest day of his GAA life.


    Why is nobody asking what the f£$k was Gleeson thinking? After all the hassle and hullabaloo over Tadgh de Burca which was only resolved on Friday night , how can and right minded player do what Gleeson did and hope to get away with it. I might get stick for this but while he is a cracking player, I wouldn't consider him the most intellegent player I've ever seen.

    The appeals process is too long-winded and cumbersome too. There should be a citing commisioner tasked with reviewing all the weekend's controversies. He would review these on a Monday morning. Any player cited would have 48 hours to appeal if they so wish. Any appeal that is considered frivolous should have the orignal ban extended. (From 1 to 2 games).

    Fellas have to learn to accept the consequences if they commit brainless acts on the field of play


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,277 danganabu


    people forge these are amateur sportsmen that devote their entire year to playing in an all ireland final.

    people seem to forget that. thankfully, it looks like the all ireland final will have the current hurler of the year in it, would have been a disaster if he was suspended for what is an awful rule.

    time for the GAA to make it a black card or yellow card offence.

    I got off for drink driving there last year, told the judge I wasn't a professional driver and I have devoted all year to drinking and driving, he said no bother sorry about that be on your way :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,832 ✭✭✭ Poor_old_gill


    The irony of it all is the rules are there, mostly, to protect players like Gleeson so I find it very frustrating when the argument is made not to apply them.
    If theres no rules then some headless hatchetman will just be put onto the field to take out players like Gleeson.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,474 ✭✭✭✭ dxhound2005


    people forge these are amateur sportsmen that devote their entire year to playing in an all ireland final.

    people seem to forget that. thankfully, it looks like the all ireland final will have the current hurler of the year in it, would have been a disaster if he was suspended for what is an awful rule.

    time for the GAA to make it a black card or yellow card offence.

    So much for all the calls for "consistency". Waterford fans want to have a whole new rule book for incidents that happen in semi finals. The referees should go on strike.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,171 ✭✭✭ blue note


    What is it with some GAA people and their complete disregard for the rules, the breaking of them, and the subsequent punishments? All you see online today is people defending the Gleesons and saying what a disgrace it would be if two amateur athletes are denied their big day and are suspended for the final. Similar happened after the Connolly incident earlier in the year.

    I don't even think that's the most common opinion online, let alone all people are saying. Most comments I'm reading are saying that the rules are the rules and they should be banned.
    These rules are not "nonsense". They're there to prevent injury, discourage foul play, and promote respect for officials. Understandably frustrating for supporters of the affected teams, but it's completely disingenuous to say they are "nonsense" and should result in no punishment.

    I think this is what is annoying a lot of people here. Deburca was banned and I think most people felt it was a wrong call and it was probably an accident, but the GAA had to stick by their process and enforce the ban. Because there was no evidence to show that the linesman got the call wrong. Now you have two other possible bans and in both cases there was no danger of injury or disrespect of officials. And discourage foul play - you could say that about every infringement, but you can't use a red card to punish everything.

    A pull on the helmet or a slap with the hurley can be dangerous, but these two weren't. They were at the minor end of it. But now we're faced with another 2 potential bans for infringements that weren't actually dangerous, because we have to stick to our process. I find it hard to get behind that.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,961 ✭✭✭ KrustyUCC


    Might as well play with no rules in all semi finals if lads can get away with red card incidents just because 'ah sure it would be a shame for him to miss the final'

    Let them flake each other and ignore the ball

    Should probably do away with all yellow cards and frees as well

    What is the learning outcome for Gleeson? Rip a fellas helmet off but sure that's fine

    He might just learn if he is rightly banned for the final

    Of course the referee will chicken out and let him play


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,192 ✭✭✭✭ super_furry


    Yep they need to scrap that helmet pulling rule if they're just not going to bother enforcing up. I'm looking forward to a time when a man is free to rip off some other lads helmet *ahem*


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,223 ✭✭✭✭ tipp_Gunner


    What is it with some GAA people and their complete disregard for the rules, the breaking of them, and the subsequent punishments? All you see online today is people defending the Gleesons and saying what a disgrace it would be if two amateur athletes are denied their big day and are suspended for the final. Similar happened after the Connolly incident earlier in the year.

    They broke the rules, there are punishments in place for people who do so, to suggest that they should bend these for those who do so simply because they are amateur sportspeople undermines the integrity of the sport as a whole.

    These rules are not "nonsense". They're there to prevent injury, discourage foul play, and promote respect for officials. Understandably frustrating for supporters of the affected teams, but it's completely disingenuous to say they are "nonsense" and should result in no punishment.

    The integrity of the sport is at stake if these incidents go unpunished!


    Its the inconsistency that gets me. Aussie Gleeson and Tuohy get off when it is clear they interfered with the helmet. Ok perhaps Tuohy should be given the benefit of the doubt somewhat but Aussie is very very lucky. This rule was brought in after Declan Fanning lost half his ear in 2010 and still bears the scars today.

    On the other hand you have Jason Forde who was banned earlier this year for what?? Nudging Davy Fitz with a shoulder.

    Diarmuid Connolly was done for shoving the linesman, fair enough he did make contact. Evan Comerford was done in the same way for allegedly shoving Paddy Russell, also fair enough albeit no camera was there. But then Brian Cody gets away with shoving the linesman on tv? What is the difference between Connolly and Cody incident?? :confused:

    This is not an anti-Cody or anti-Aussie Gleeson tirade but surely fairness should apply across the board?


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,456 ✭✭✭✭ road_high


    Its the inconsistency that gets me. Aussie Gleeson and Tuohy get off when it is clear they interfered with the helmet. Ok perhaps Tuohy should be given the benefit of the doubt somewhat but Aussie is very very lucky. This rule was brought in after Declan Fanning lost half his ear in 2010 and still bears the scars today.

    On the other hand you have Jason Forde who was banned earlier this year for what?? Nudging Davy Fitz with a shoulder.

    Diarmuid Connolly was done for shoving the linesman, fair enough he did make contact. Evan Comerford was done in the same way for allegedly shoving Paddy Russell, also fair enough albeit no camera was there. But then Brian Cody gets away with shoving the linesman on tv? What is the difference between Connolly and Cody incident?? :confused:

    This is not an anti-Cody or anti-Aussie Gleeson tirade but surely fairness should apply across the board?

    What difference would it really have made though? What would be the outcome or punishment- relegate Cody to the stand for the next game? I doubt it would have made any difference as he's not physically playing the match!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 24,223 ✭✭✭✭ tipp_Gunner


    road_high wrote: »
    What difference would it really have made though? What would be the outcome or punishment- relegate Cody to the stand for the next game? I doubt it would have made any difference as he's not physically playing the match!

    Well you could argue the same for Davy Fitz. The rules are there and have to be obeyed by players and mentors alike


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,724 ✭✭✭ nice_guy80


    I've seen a lad being sent off for a wild pull, that didn't actually connect with anything or anyone
    in fact, the referee just said it was just dangerous play...

    and Austin gets away with pulling a helmet off someone, on the sly


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,456 ✭✭✭✭ road_high


    Well you could argue the same for Davy Fitz. The rules are there and have to be obeyed by players and mentors alike

    Indeed. I can't even remember now, but was/wasn't Davy relegated to the stand for a match this year? It's an infinitely smaller issue than player disciplinary actions and far less likely to be the winning or losing of the next game. Mangers etc aren't the ones playing. Not one to get too hot and bothered about unless it becomes a big issue impinging on the game to a major degree.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,034 ✭✭✭ Amprodude


    The GAA are pathetic. They only apply the rules when it suits them.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 100 ✭✭ JimTreacy


    Its the inconsistency that gets me. Aussie Gleeson and Tuohy get off when it is clear they interfered with the helmet. Ok perhaps Tuohy should be given the benefit of the doubt somewhat but Aussie is very very lucky. This rule was brought in after Declan Fanning lost half his ear in 2010 and still bears the scars today.

    On the other hand you have Jason Forde who was banned earlier this year for what?? Nudging Davy Fitz with a shoulder.

    Diarmuid Connolly was done for shoving the linesman, fair enough he did make contact. Evan Comerford was done in the same way for allegedly shoving Paddy Russell, also fair enough albeit no camera was there. But then Brian Cody gets away with shoving the linesman on tv? What is the difference between Connolly and Cody incident?? :confused:

    This is not an anti-Cody or anti-Aussie Gleeson tirade but surely fairness should apply across the board?
    Was the linesman not trying to keep Cody away from Shanahan, Mcgrath because they were trying to control the line balls.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 534 ✭✭✭ Stopitwillya



    Diarmuid Connolly was done for shoving the linesman, fair enough he did make contact. Evan Comerford was done in the same way for allegedly shoving Paddy Russell, also fair enough albeit no camera was there. But then Brian Cody gets away with shoving the linesman on tv? What is the difference between Connolly and Cody incident?? :confused:

    Not a big difference to be honest.

    Both were in the wrong. You should never put your hands on an official. Both cody and connolly did this. Cody was lucky in the way the linesman handled the situation. But he was in the wrong. Of course duignam, brennan, tyrell and shefflin wouldnt dare criticize cody on the sunday game, while spillane loved the opportunity to have a go at Connolly. If connolly was from kerry he would have the same rose tinted glasses as the kilkenny pundits and jim treacy (obviously from kilkenny) have.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,456 ✭✭✭✭ road_high


    Not a big difference to be honest.

    Both were in the wrong. You should never put your hands on an official. Both cody and connolly did this. Cody was lucky in the way the linesman handled the situation. But he was in the wrong. Of course duignam, brennan, tyrell and shefflin wouldnt dare criticize cody on the sunday game, while spillane loved the opportunity to have a go at Connolly. If connolly was from kerry he would have the same rose tinted glasses as the kilkenny pundits and jim treacy (obviously from kilkenny) have.

    I support kilkenny and wouldn't have given a fiddlers if they'd banned Cody from the sideline from the next game or whatever the punishment would be.
    Players and management are not the same thing. Banning a player can have dire consequences, a manager far less so.
    There are and should be rules for both but I can't draw the paralell between Cody and a player, Connolly.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,983 ✭✭✭ Sunny Disposition


    Very bad moment for the GAA, inter county disciplinary system is a laughing stock tonight.
    Some serious questions to be answered. How can a player who everyone knows has earned a suspension not get one?
    I'm curious about the role of the referee here. It seems he has said he adjudicated on the day. Has he or any other office no right to admit/point out a mistake has been made and revisit the incident?
    GUBU stuff, a total farce.


  • Registered Users Posts: 328 ✭✭ HatchetMan7


    Both Tuohy and Gleesons helmet incidents were dealt with the same way. Both refs saw or partially saw what happened in real time not replay in slow motion and both thought were accidental. Now obviously Gleesons was deliberate and looking at the Tuohy one a good few times imo I think he knew what he was gripping but if Gleeson got suspended and Tuohy didn't I wouldn't be up in arms over it as Gleesons helmet pull was very blatant.

    IMO though I think they should look at the rule again and give no card for unintentional and not dangerous, yellow card for intentional but not deemed dangerous and a red card for intentional and dangerous. I'm not trying to suggest that Gleesons wasn't a red but I think players will get red cards in the future for something that's less dangerous than your typical yellow card like a shoulder into the chest. Just my biased two cents.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 231 ✭✭ patsyrockem


    The other side of the argument, what if a player misses the all Ireland final because he gets 25 stitches around his ear after someone rips his helmet off. The people who say Austin shouldn't miss the final should consider that outcome. He was an idiot to do what he did and should have been punished accordingly.


Advertisement