Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Club Championships 2022/23

Options
13940414244

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 68,161 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    They were probably aware that KC had no intention of ever playing a replay. They had no immediate interest in contesting the result and only decided to do it when the wider implications became apparent.

    They did what they did in the interests of the game IMO and for that, those who hold the integrity of the game above any individual or club, should be grateful.

    I am.



  • Registered Users Posts: 20,891 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    I don't know what wider implications were apparent? They only had to wait for a few days to let the process continue, and put the onus on the GAA and Crokes to decide the next steps. They were just as much playing a guessing game as the rest of us whether Crokes would have accepted a replay. They did nothing to further the interests of the game by not letting the process take its course.

    Before they objected they tried to take the "moral high ground" by looking for clarification. Which was a nonsense when they could read the rules and form whatever opinion the same as anyone else.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,457 ✭✭✭✭gormdubhgorm


    The other argument is that the error was also compounded by the officials not doing their job correctly. And it not solely K. Crokes job to wholly officiate. That is the officials job.

    So by K. Crokes accepting a replay it would appear as if they were accepting 100% of the blame which they are obviously not prepared to do.

    Plus Glen must realise that the error did not truly affect the result. And they would only be getting another chance by an error which did not impact the result.

    But again the decision should not have been left in the hands of the clubs. CLG should have assessed the situation giving some sort of definitive viewpoint.

    Guff about stuff, and stuff about guff.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,161 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    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.



  • Registered Users Posts: 20,891 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    That is a misreading of the rules. There is no compunction on the GAA to make a ruling in the absence of an objection. It is one of two options, and in my opinion they chose correctly in the knowledge that any ruling they made over the heads of the clubs would result in an objection. If Glen chose not to object, they would have done so as you say in the knowledge that Crokes would keep the title. What is the point of not pursuing it when they did raise the objection?

    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



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,933 ✭✭✭Rosita


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



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,161 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    The point is that the rules were upheld. I fancy the rule that the GAA cannot intervene when there is a clear breach of the rules will now come under scrutiny and possible review. Let clubs object if they wish. In this case the hard evidence was there for all to see.

    Glen withdrew when it was clear Crokes were going to try and get around that compelling evidence.

    Keep the cup if it is that important to you. Kinda like how you would deal with a sulking child really.



  • Registered Users Posts: 20,891 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    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?



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,161 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady



    The outcome of all this is thus.

    The GAA ordered a replay because the result was not valid under the rules. Whether that replay took place or not is immaterial TBH. A principle of the game has been upheld. And that is, or should be, important to us all.



  • Registered Users Posts: 20,891 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    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.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 68,161 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    The principle that a rule break gets a sanction was upheld.

    The sanction being the nullifying of the result implicit in oprdering a replay.

    That was the point of the objection and it succeeded in upholding the rules.

    Glen basically told Crokes to keep the cup if it was that important to them.



  • Registered Users Posts: 51,652 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


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



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,630 ✭✭✭✭thebaz


    The game is not being replayed - the result stands - I'm neutral and not connected to Crokes, but you do seam to have a bit resentment towards Crokes



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,161 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    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.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,630 ✭✭✭✭thebaz


    as a neutral, I would not see it as cheating , no doubt they were time wasting , and it back fired ; but as I have said repeatedly the referee has a lot of responsibity for not re-taking the play - thats it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 20,891 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    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.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,661 ✭✭✭54and56


    Case closed and not an asterisk in sight as the CCCC "had 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" but no doubt @FrancieBrady will continue to live in denial and spout his conspiracy theories 😋

    https://www.gaa.ie/football/news/kilmacud-crokes-formally-awarded-2023-aib-all-ireland-club-sfc/





  • Registered Users Posts: 68,161 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    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'.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,933 ✭✭✭Rosita


    There'll be no asterisk on any match programme or any winners' list that you pick up in the future. It sounds like a good thing to say right now but we all know it's nuts to pretend to actually believe it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,161 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


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



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 20,891 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    They were forced to make some decision by Glen refusing to take part in the replay. I have seen games where there were more than 15 players, when subs went on the field to join in a melee. That would be an equal breach of the rules, and would forever taint the result of that game.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,161 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady




  • Registered Users Posts: 20,891 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    And their decision will be judged right or wrong by different people. The right decision in my view would have been a fine. But it was a disgrace for Glen to pull out of the process before it concluded.



  • Registered Users Posts: 162 ✭✭6run28


    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.



  • Registered Users Posts: 20,891 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    By implication it does put the entire blame on the officials. Which if fair enough by the rules, as the ref is the only one with the power to restart play.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,161 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


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



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,008 ✭✭✭Cluedo Monopoly


    It was always going to be that outcome. A replay would have been a farce and no way to win/lose a title.

    What are they doing in the Hyacinth House?



  • Registered Users Posts: 20,891 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    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.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,336 ✭✭✭✭bucketybuck


    Congratulations to Kilmacud Crokes, now unequivocally declared champions in a way that absolutely cannot be denied.

    It is disappointing that Glen started a complaints process and then did not have the strength of their convictions to follow through, but I can excuse them as they were probably egged on by the disingenuous peanut gallery.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 68,161 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    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.



Advertisement