corofin gaa

headmaster wrote: »

No Sir, this was not a once off for some of the corofin club officials. Get your facts right and don't expect me to make you any wiser. The match is over, so is my contribution to this thread.

Before you sign off a couple of things:
1. Didnt mean to be sarcastic but fed up reading alot of posts that are biased or have facts wrong and most people who criticise committees never volunteer their services(not saying you fall into this group)

2. Know the Corofin chairman and would have thought he was honourable.He did say in the Indo that the club would never condon the behaviour. Secretary appears new based on Galway club list of secretaries and dont know much about him.

3. Ray Silke in his article today in the Advertiser covered alot of what has been discussed here and had a right cut at Connacht Council.He also said that Corofin had their chances and didnt take them .Nothing here I would disagree with him .For the record his brother who was the Corofin manager is of the same cloth and as hounarable as you rightly described Ray.

In relation to the match congrats to St Bridgets and I for one feel if they get over London )which is a potential banana skin for all teams travelling over there)they will give the All Ireland a right go.
The ref was inexperienced and made mistakes that affected Corofin more than St Bridgets
-the booking of P Kelly which meant that Corofin had to alter their shape early.
-the goal(my gut reaction is it was a goal)
-a foul on Gary Sice followed by a dubious free in which was a score.
-The calls on Damien Burke which appear to get to his confidence.He was a key man for Corofin all year and this did affect them.

On the other hand I support referees that move the ball in ten yards for argueing and this happened a number of times to Corofin(2 of which ended in scores).Find it hard to believe that Bridgets didnt argue many of their frees but only the players on pitch /ref know whether they did or not.

I also heard today that a Mayo player living in Tuam was quoted today as saying head of referee panel in Connacht (Mac Eli according to their website which I think translates to MCHale)was from the Ballina club. Fact or fiction??
The action of a number of Corofin supporters(and I recognise two that are not from Corofin club) is unacceptable but I do think the stewarding left a bit to be desired(and I'm not saying Bridgets totaly at fault here)

Thats my reading on last Sunday for what it is worth.

nice_guy80 wrote: »

hold on.

Didn't the Corofin Club CHAIRMAN receive a ban in 2006 in the Connacht final vs Brigids for coming onto the pitch during the game and having an altercation with a Brigids player???

Different Chairman I believe

iwsf wrote: »

One thing that i cannot understand , why on earth was this game played in Killtoon and not on neutral ground !

Kiltoom is the Roscommon County Boards second ground after Dr Hyde Park. It is also one of the best club grounds in the province and regularly hosts NFL games.

Due to an arrangement between the Connacht counties, home advantage alternates between the county representatives in the club championship. Home advantage meaning that the game will be played in an inter-county standard ground in one of the participating counties.

This year it was the Roscommon champions turn to have home advantage against the Galway representatives. St Bridgids won through to the final against Corofin and so could choose to host the match in the Hyde or in Kiltoom. Naturally they choose Kiltoom.

The Connacht Council were responsible for stewarding at the match. The stewards were directed to open any gates and let supporters on to the pitch after the game. The stewards did so. However, instead of allowing St Bridgid's celebrate their achievement of retaining the Connacht championship some neanderthals from Galway sought out the referee.

The two issues about home advantage and stewarding are red herrings. They are being used by Corofin and their media mouthpieces to deflect attention away from the disgraceful scenes they were responsible for.

This has nothing to do with St Bridgid's or Roscommon GAA.

Having watched the game at the time as a neutral, I thought the referee was fairly even to both sides. Of course there were a few contentious decisions such as the ones mentioned before on this thread (the Brigids player appearing to have fouled a Corofin player but winning the free being one). The strangest thing to me however was the fact Corofin's attempt at tackling seemed to involve dragging out of players and when the free was given against them they reacted angrily turning around to the referee as if to say 'what did I do wrong'. Now this could of course relate to the earlier incident but you just have to get on with it and keep your head.

I've had this ref before at both underage and senior, and I've covered games for the press in which he was involved and I've always thought him to be a genuinely good referee who lets the game flow when possible and I wasn't surprised to see him as the representative from Mayo. I'd definitely prefer him to some other referees in the county who I'd rather not mention - who seem to get their noses stuck in something every game as if they want to be part of the action.

The way Corofin are going on they think he had it out for him. It's an idiotic idea. Why would he give a monkeys who wins? Remember these guys aren't getting paid a dime, they're travelling to different places in the middle of winter with their only thought of it being to see the game run smoothly and they might get a 'thanks' afterwards.

Our coaches always said that once you start blaming outside influences (referee, weather, pitch, umpires, whatever) then you're just making excuses. Look at yourself first before anything else.

As for the shameful actions afterwards, anyone involved shouldn't be let near a pitch again. Kieran Fitzgerald doesn't help either by just laying the loss all on the referee. I'm involved in club football in Mayo (no.. not Ballina before anyone starts) and I'd be cringing if any of our supporters approached a referee after the game.

We do need referees for our games to go ahead. I wouldn't dream of putting on a referees jersey after that.

Strongbow10 wrote: »

as a neutral I watched the game and although the ref got a few decisions wrong, its way over the top to say he gave everything to the roscommon club. And the fan reaction was pretty disgraceful, grown men embarrassing themselves on national television. Had to cringe at the bloke in the silly green and gold wig trying to get a dig in at the ref.

Another poster mentioned it, the corofin style of tackling was bizarre. Its clear they set out to be aggressive and knock St.Brigids out of their rhythm from the off, and they grew very frustrated in the second half at failure to do such. The dragging of players in the tackle is a real flaw they have and they were susceptible to frees for sure there can be no argument there.

He gave a couple of bad calls but it was not a case he gave St Brigids everything. The goal decision was very unfortunate, what i'd like to know is what the hell the umpire was at?

One other issue I may raise is that its easy to see why Corofin fans may be aggrieved at the referee in terms of impartiality. We see in soccer how some ref's tend to be "homers" influenced by the calls of the home crowd.

Imagine if he had given the bad call in favour of St Brigids and they lost the game? From what I could see the stewards were all Brigids men (idiotic that there are not indepedent stewards whose job it is to specifically look after crowd control and protect a ref in a instance like this) with all the jumping around celebrating rather than concentrating on their job.

Would the stewards have held off their own aggrieved home fans if a controversial result had gone to Corofin? My guess is the ref would have been lynched.

Hence you have to question a ref's impartiality in games to a certain degree, he will want to get out of there alive given the large majority of home fans. I'm not saying its as blatant as that but it could make a ref lean one way when it comes to crucial decisions.

The stewarding needs to be looked at though, too busy yelping and yahooing as someone said to have the cop on to do their job in this instance.

As was mentioned earlier the connacht council stewards were supposed to be looking after the ref, all further enquiries should be forwarded to the paid connacht council secretary Mr j prenty

Lord Ned Stark wrote: »

just scanning through the photos of the game and came across this
http://www.connachtgaa.ie/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=21646

seems to be all over the brigids player hes up on his back

Does the umpire appear to have his eyes closed. Maybe someone who knows the rules can comment on whether it matter where you end up after you connect with the ball. My view is that he did connect with the Bridgets player but after he connected with the ball ,therefore no free??? Right or wrong?

:DAt least umpire opened his eyes here. doesnt prove much either way. You are allowed be in the square when you make contact with the ball i think.

nice_guy80 wrote: »

I like this one better...


he's all over the Brigids player.
plus, inside the parallelogram...

Duckworth_Luas wrote: »

The Corofin player had one hand placed on the defenders back. This impeded the St Bridgid's player. The referee deemed it to be a push in the back and awarded a free out. The Corofin player used his free hand to punch the ball into the net. However, as a foul had occurred then no goal was ever scored. Also, no square ball was awarded.

No goal was awarded by the umpires. The referee had blown for a free out before the ball crossed the goal-line. Therefore the referee did not have to overrule them and disallow the goal. Note that the umpires did not raise the crossed flags.

No square ball was awarded. If it was the umpire or referee would have pointed to the parallelogram.

It was a free out. Nobody with even the minimum knowledge of Gaelic games could dispute that fact.

Will have to watch the video again in relation to no 18 fouling or not but do know two things that I saw with my own eyes
(a) the umpire nearest the corofin player nodded accross to his other umpire to put up the green flag
(b)the flags were crossed disallowing the goal
.

fair play for ever wrote: »

Will have to watch the video again in relation to no 18 fouling or not but do know two things that I saw with my own eyes
(a) the umpire nearest the corofin player nodded accross to his other umpire to put up the green flag
(b)the flags were crossed disallowing the goal
.

OK, I'll take your word on that. Wasn't shown on TV.

So the umpires allowed the "goal" but were then overruled by the ref. In that case he should be commended. It appears that he was one of a small group of people that saw the blatant foul live or in even in TV replays. Well done ref!

tasmanr wrote: »

Many people have the impression that TV and the press are interested in fair play. They are not - they are full of their own self-importance. Having a goal disallowed and claiming it should have not being sells print, give the egoists more airtime and column inches. The pictures in the links above conclude that the goal should have being disallowed for 2 reasons. One reason is sufficient reason.

Will the TG4 hacks apologise ..... doubt it.

As they say, you are entitled to your opinion but given you are from roscommon and based on your hogan stand posts i feel you could be a tad biased. I am from Galway so am prob a bit biased the other way but trying to be fair.

My gut and they always say go with your gut is that it was a goal .I would have bigger issue with one or two of his other decisions but hey thats life,not alway fair.All i know is that most out and out neutrals and quite a few roscommon people feel that on balance Corofin lost every 50:50 decision.

Anyway its over now and the result wont change regardless of right or wrong.On a slightly different note I notice the Tyrone teams got a token fine (something like £350 and next two league games at neutral ground)for allegedly beating the crap out of anything that moved on the pitch .Gives grounds to Corofin for argueing a minimum fine based on precedient and while I am not that familiar with the Tyrone case most posters on the various formums have said that the incident in Kiltoom was way down the scale of seriousness when comparing it to Tyrone.(Before anyone goes off their head I am not condoning behaviour in Kiltoom). Your Thoughts.

fair play for ever wrote: »

:DAt least umpire opened his eyes here. doesnt prove much either way.

Don't know if you're taking the piss or not, but I'm fairly sure he's just blinking.

elefant wrote: »

Don't know if you're taking the piss or not, but I'm fairly sure he's just blinking.

Not sure myself to be honest;)

bruschi wrote: »

so whats your point? where are you going with this?
Just getting peoples view on it. Thought this was part of the idea of these boards .get peoples different views on items.I'd say it would be interesting to be a fly on the wall in any discussions in Connacht Council and when Corofin go in to discuss the incidents.

I have said the Tyrone incident is not a precedent that this should be viewed on. I have said earlier that I thnk Corofin should be punished for what happened, and it was disgraceful and there is no excuse for it. Also, going with your gut, is not how frees are determined. Especially when you say "You are allowed be in the square when you make contact with the ball i think". you are not even sure of the basic square ball rule, but yet your gut says the goal should have stood. It was never a legitimate goal, and pretty much anyone on here thinks the same. It was a free, as can be clearly seen from the video still above. It was correctly disallowed.

For clarity am aware there is no mention of been allowed in the square when contact made with the ball.the rule is that you cannot be in before the ball.I would interpret arriving at the same time as the ball to be ok but am not a referee. Most people in Galway seem to think it was a goal be they on here or elsewhere ,most people from Roscommon think it wasnt a goal and from what i can see outside these counties there are mixed views. I have also said it doesnt really matter anymore as it aint changing. Ref prob went with his gut reaction as well .It is well documented that its an extremely difficult rule to get right.

forfcksake wrote: »

The flags were NOT crossed, dunno what game you were at

I am 99.99% certain they were but will check with one or two that were with me just to be sure,