All Ireland Senior Hurling (Liam Mccarthy Cup) 2019

Hawkeye9212 wrote: »

He did let the medical staff deal with the player. This happens all the time. The referee handled the situation well. I can't believe people are criticising him for consulting with his linesman. Nothing wrong with having a chat with Hogan as well.

I didn't like the way he went over to take a look at Barrett while he was being assessed, was like when he saw him going through the checks it influenced his decision. But either way he connected, so the right decision. Pity all the same.

lufties wrote: »

Well, personally I know many who cant stand varadkar. Seeing his gormless face after such a win would make me look the other way. Just a natural reaction when you see someone you have no respect for.

Three posts in this thread, in fact three posts in the GAA forum in the last year, none about hurling. Talk about off-topic.

Joe_ Public wrote: »

The implication, by several posters, that the referee approaches the grounded Barrett to elicit his opinion on whether he'd been struck in the face might not be the biggest load of horlicks i've seen posted over the past 24 or so hours, but it's not far off. The first duty of the officials is to player welfare and any referee, seeing a player stricken on the ground, regardless of how it might have occurred, will first seek to establish whether urgent medical attention is required before taking further action. The idea that Owens actually required Barrett's input to decide Hogan's fate? Words honestly fail me, but that's where we are with this thread i dare say.

With all due respect if he was that concerned about Barrett why didn't he check on him first? Either way IMO it was a soft red card. Especially when pundits are lining to to congratulate Owens for applying the law, and cleere for not applying the same red card rule in the semi. Which way do you want it lads..... Rules applied or not?

Hawkeye9212 wrote: »

He did let the medical staff deal with the player. This happens all the time. The referee handled the situation well. I can't believe people are criticising him for consulting with his linesman. Nothing wrong with having a chat with Hogan as well.

In actual fact having watched the highlights back (full game not up on RTÉ player yet), he chats with the linesman, has a look at the treatment of Barrett, goes back to the linesman and then goes to Richie.

His checking of the treatment of Barrett as opposed speaking to the medical staff to see if he needed extra treatment etc. as you have rightly suggested is part of his role in player safety suggest to me he was looking for a reason to give the card rather than not. I am not for one second saying it was not a red card but the delay in giving it suggests doubt in the referees mind. We also have to remember that the ref does not have the benefit of slow mo replays like we do.

I don’t understand having the chat with Richie either. It was also clear that whatever he didn’t give an indication of the intent to show red as Richie was clearly shocked when he took out the card. If he went over and said “it’s a high tackle, I have no choice but red card” fine but having a chat with him and seeing the player visibly shocked when he shows the red card doesn’t add up.

I don’t think anyone has criticised him for consulting the linesman either (although I would question the second chat).

As a final point on this. If people believe that Richie deserved a red card then they cannot say that Barrett didn’t. It’s either in the rules or not. Two different situations yes but a tackle or strike above the head is red.

To clarify the rules;
Category III Infractions
5.16 To strike or to attempt to strike an opponent with arm, elbow, hand or knee.
5.17 To strike or attempt to strike an opponent with a hurley, with minimal force

Shane_ef wrote: »

Separate, Investigate, Officiate.
So separate any parties needed, injured players will always be attended to by there medical staff and even without an official they will go about what is needed.
Investigate if needed, in this case the condition of the player and views of other officials.
Officiate, so confer with other officials and make a ruling.

I was thought that years ago

But he didn’t follow that procedure is the point.
There was no separation needed. Fine
He spoke to the linesman. Fine
He went over to see where Barrett was being treated. Didn’t check the condition of the player which with all the talk of concussion these days was also wrong.
He then went back to the linesman.
And then he officiated.

Last Stop wrote: »

To clarify the rules;
Category III Infractions
5.16 To strike or to attempt to strike an opponent with arm, elbow, hand or knee.
5.17 To strike or attempt to strike an opponent with a hurley, with minimal force

funnily enough you forgot the preceding bit which qualifies it

RULE 5 - AGGRESSIVE FOULS
Deliberate or Accidental Fouls:
In the following components of this Rule on Aggressive
Fouls, there are references made to specific infractions
being penalised by Caution or Ordering Off – signalled
by Cards of a stated colour. A Card shall be issued only
where the Infraction is deemed by the Referee to have
been deliberate and not accidental

murphk wrote: »

funnily enough you forgot the preceding bit which qualifies it

Any time your hurl makes contact with your opponents head is dangerous play and hard to call accidental. If we are to take player safety serious then it should have been a red card.

bruschi wrote: »

also funnily enough, whilst also leaving out the intentional, he left out the preceding aggressive foul section

Funnily enough he didn’t even caution Barrett so has failed to apply 2 rules regardless of interpretation

bruschi wrote: »

2 rules?

But again, you're missing the entire disclaimer at the start of the section

RULE 5 - AGGRESSIVE FOULS
Deliberate or Accidental Fouls:
In the following components of this Rule on Aggressive
Fouls, there are references made to specific infractions
being penalised by Caution or Ordering Off – signalled
by Cards of a stated colour. A Card shall be issued only
where the Infraction is deemed by the Referee to have
been deliberate and not accidental

[\quote]

Hitting someone across the head is not deliberate? He intended to get the ball but didn’t and got the man instead.

farmerval wrote: »

One of the funny consequences of the new system could easily be a team winning the All-Ireland having lost three games in the championship.
Kilkenny could have won yesterday having lost to Galway and Wexford.
Conceivably a team could lose two in the round robin, lose a provincial final and still win the All-Ireland.
Tipp this year beat, Cork, Clare, Limerick, Waterford, Laois, wexford and Kilkenny as well as losing to Limerick. It's a lot of games and at the end the team that won the most games won out.

Limerick could have lost the Munster final which would be 3 games lost and still win Liam.
System needs changing to champion league style format and **** the provincial finals.

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

Deleted: poster i was replying to deleted his post

Sorry about that I get a bit paranoid about the tone of my posts so I often delete them..but i do think it should be munster champions vs Leinster champions in AI final. It cheapens the provincials when runner up goes onto win AI. Also you will have teams going all out to win the provincials. Anyway they get 4 chances as it is so why give them another back door. thats not a sleight on Tipp btw they won the games that mattered and are deserving champs

Lots on here saying Kilkenny are whingeing too much about the red card and possibly they are right. But I think it is a natural reaction immediately after an All Ireland final. Yet despite what some think we are not the saltiest off them all. I opened Twitter this morning and there was Shane Dowling still whingeing about a line ball that shouldn't even be theirs in the first place. Cian Lynch was at it the day before the All Ireland too. Calling for VAR because one decision went against you and still at it 2 weeks later. I think it's time to park the red card thing now as no one is going to change their position at this stage. Time for Limerick to do the same and maybe just one person in the media to acknowledge that it wasn't a Limerick ball in the first place. Has anyone seen how VAR is working in soccer. Do we really want all those stoppages in GAA.

Last Stop wrote: »

But he didn’t follow that procedure is the point.
There was no separation needed. Fine
He spoke to the linesman. Fine
He went over to see where Barrett was being treated. Didn’t check the condition of the player which with all the talk of concussion these days was also wrong.
He then went back to the linesman.
And then he officiated.

Who the ref talked to, and the order he did it in, has no bearing on whether the decision was correct or not.

corner back 2 wrote: »

Lots on here saying Kilkenny are whingeing too much about the red card and possibly they are right. But I think it is a natural reaction immediately after an All Ireland final. Yet despite what some think we are not the saltiest off them all. I opened Twitter this morning and there was Shane Dowling still whingeing about a line ball that shouldn't even be theirs in the first place. Cian Lynch was at it the day before the All Ireland too. Calling for VAR because one decision went against you and still at it 2 weeks later. I think it's time to park the red card thing now as no one is going to change their position at this stage. Time for Limerick to do the same and maybe just one person in the media to acknowledge that it wasn't a Limerick ball in the first place. Has anyone seen how VAR is working in soccer. Do we really want all those stoppages in GAA.

I looked at Shane's twitter account and one of his last tweets is wishing Kilkenny the best of luck in the final. I don't see any tweets where he is whinging.