Club Championships 2022/23

The 'wider implication' of them not launching an objection was that the result would have stood despite a clear breaking of the GAA's rules.

Pulling out of the process once that principle had been established and upheld was quite legitimate as the ruling hasn't changed. If you break the rules you will be ordered to replay the game.

The rule provides for remedies other than a replay so your last statement is incorrect.

They can intervene, but why use it when it would result in an objection anyway? The rule is suitable vague by having the "depending on the circumstances" clause, and any decision should give consideration to the circumstances in each case.

The process is there for Crokes to lodge an appeal to "get around" the ruling. Did Glen not realise this before they started the process? And did they not realise that one of the possible outcomes, a replay, would not suit them before they started?

There is no principle involved, just a rule break which was being dealt with by the established process. It should have been let continue until the end.

The 'win' is now tainted and there will be a big asterix symbol after the year on the winners chart.

The result of that game would have stood regardless. However those who know, will know that it was achieved by breaking the rules and that the GAA upheld this view and ordered the game to replayed.

Whenever cheating is mentioned this game will be too. That's the legacy for the Crokes. Sometimes you have to be brave to ensure your legacy has integrity.

It is not a principle, it is a rule. There is no mention of the word principle in the GAA Rules Part 1. There are three mentions of the word principle, two of them in the paragraph below taken from the Ethos section. The other reference in an Appendix is to the principles espoused by Dr Croke and the other founding fathers.

"1.12 Anti-Sectarian/Anti-Racist The Association is Anti-Sectarian, Anti-Racist and committed to the principles of inclusion and diversity at all levels. Any conduct by deed, word, or gesture of sectarian or racist nature or which is contrary to the principles of inclusion and diversity against a player, official, spectator or anyone else, in the course of activities organised by the Association, shall be deemed to have discredited the Association."

6.44 is simply a rule about the number of players, and more. Objections lodged under this or any rule are not setting a new principle, merely following long established procedure. There is no option to Nullify a result. (this is a copy and paste, and a bit jumbled in places)

6.44 Rules of Specification and Control - Penalties Penalties for breaches of the above Rules shall be as follows: (a) A team failing to field fifteen players, inclusive of players ordered off or retired injured, by the start of the second half of a game: Penalty : Forfeiture of Game and Award to the Opposing Team. (b) (i) A team exceeding the number of players permitted under Rule 2.1 Rules of Specification, Playing Rules: (ii) A team exceeding the number of substitutions permitted under Rules 2.4 (i) and (ii) or breaching Rule 2.4 (iv) (b), Rules of Specification, Playing Rules: Penalties: On a proven Objection - Award of Game to the Opposing Team, or Replay, or Fine, depending on the circumstances. On an Inquiry by the Committee-in-Charge - Forfeiture of Game without Award of Game to the Opposing Team, or Replay, or Fine, depending on the circumstances. (c) (i) Failure to provide a list of Players as specified in Rule: (ii) A Substitution (including a Temporary Substitution) being made of a player whose name is not supplied to the Referee or the Sideline Official, as appropriate, and as specified in Rule: (iii) In Inter-County games, a Substitution, (including a Temporary Substitution) being made of a player whose name is not on the list of Players supplied to the Referee: Penalty: On an Inquiry by the Committee-in-Charge - Forfeiture of Game, without Award to the Opposing Team, or Fine, depending on the circumstances. (d) Late Fielding. (i) A team taking the field late before game: Penalties: County or Provincial - Fine €100; Club Fine €20 - for every five minutes or part thereof up to 15 minutes, and thereafter for every minute or part thereof up to 30 minutes. For over 30 minutes after the appointed Starting Time, the Game shall be considered as conceded and shall be Awarded to the Opposing Team, unless exceptional circumstances prevail. (ii) (a) A team responsible for a half time interval being exceeded as specified in Rules 3.3 and 3.7 Rules of Specification: Chapter 6 GA MES & COMPETITIONS 119 Penalties: County or Provincial - Fine €80 for every minute or part thereof; Club - Fine €10 for every minute or part thereof. (b) A team responsible for an Interval period allowed being exceeded by more than 10 minutes: Penalty: Forfeiture of Game and Award to the Opposing Team. (iii) A team(s) failing to field for obligatory extra time, within the specified minutes: Penalty: Forfeiture of Game and Award to the Opposing Team. (e) For unauthorised entry onto the field of play by a Team Official. Penalty: 4 weeks Suspension. (f) Jerseys/Colours: (i) A County team not wearing its registered distinctive colours in Inter-County competitions, or where there is a similarity of colours not wearing their registered alternative colours or other colours authorised or directed by the Controlling Council: Penalty: Fine €500. (ii) A Club team not wearing its registered distinctive club colours in Inter-Club Competitions, or where there is a similarity of colours, not wearing alternative colours approved by the Controlling Committee. Penalty: Clubs shall be liable to a minimum of €40 fine. (iii) The goalkeeper not wearing a jersey, which is distinctive from his own team’s and the opposing team’s colours: Penalty: Fine €80.

The GAA wanting to tidy things up (that is their go to position with everything) doesn't change the facts of the game.

KC won the game with 17 players on the field, which is a breach of the rules of the game. No awarding of the tournament will ever change that.

End of. You can keep up the 'denial' of that but those are the facts and are not a 'conspiracy'.

Will be mentioned forever more when these discussions come up. Just look at this thread and all the previous disputed results/transgressions.

And?

the CCCC "..made it clear this was not a deliberate action and that no fault was attributed to Kilmacud Crokes for the situation they found themselves in"

Case closed. Well done to Crokes.

It was moral cowardice and a disgrace that Crokes didn't immediately accept what the CCCC found and offer a replay.

Now that the Club Championships 2022/23 have concluded, this thread will go dormant soon enough. And there won't be a word about the football final once the CCCC decision has had a couple of days media attention. Put it down to human error and move on.

Of course it will fade away as an event. But it won't fade from memory much and all as some would like.

And with that, I will fade away. Thanks to all who discussed the issue and kept it civil.

Given the CCCC found that "no fault was attributed to Kilmacud Crokes for the situation they found themselves in" why on earth would they voluntarily offer Glen a replay?

Moral cowardice? 😂😂😂

Don't ever change Francie.

Enoch Burke isn't your real name by any chance?