A few GAA referee conundrums

Colm R · 11-06-2013 3:41pm

antoobrien wrote: »

If the player is on your team it's a free because it's an illegal pass.

Is it a free if I genuinely loose control of the ball in the course of a bounce and one of my own players gets possession?

If so, that makes my whole point redundant.

macadam · 11-06-2013 3:53pm

Colm R wrote: »

OK here is a very unlikely conundrum. Throwing the ball.

If I throw the ball at the ground and catch it again, its just a bounce.

If I throw it at the ground and, for whatever reason fail to control it, I do not think I will be penalized. Any player is now able to take possession of the ball in open play but I am not being punished for not controlling the bounce of the ball.

So basically, you're allowed throw the ball at the ground - its not necessary to catch it again. So, could I throw a ball to another player and provided the ball hits the ground before the other player receives it, then is that OK?

What say ye?

I can't imagine a situation where it could possibly happen - maybe where a player is in possession and is surrounded by two or more defenders. With no space to swing a hand or foot, he may jump in the air and throw the ball to the ground at a distance away from him.

No free ,
Bounce defined;
For a player who has caught the ball to play the ball against the ground with his hand(s) and to catch it on return to his hand(s) again.

antoobrien · 11-06-2013 3:54pm

Colm R wrote: »

Is it a free if I genuinely loose control of the ball in the course of a bounce and one of my own players gets possession?

If so, that makes my whole point redundant.

Bounce is defined in the rules

1. BOUNCE For a player who has caught the ball to play the ball against the ground with his hand(s) and to catch it on return to his hand(s) again.

What you have described falls under one of two of technical fouls, throwing the ball or incorrect handpass

feargale · 11-06-2013 9:32pm

A player kicks the football in an attempt to score. The ball bursts in transit before it crosses the goal line. The leather goes into the net and the bladder goes over the bar. You are the ref......?

kala85 · 11-06-2013 9:37pm

bren2001 wrote: »

Ball has to cross the line. It's not rugby. Play on, I regularly would step over the side line to get by an opponent, just keep the ball in play.

but under rule - a player is not allowed to step outside the boundary of the pitch at any time. - cant find the rule book at the moment but I can remember that much

So a player can step out over the line with the ball in his hand but as long as the ball isnt over the line and his hand is holding the ball inside the field of play then its play on.

I would nearly think that if a player steps out over the line with the ball in his possession regardless if the ball is actually inside the field of play or outside it , its a line ball because the player has the ball in his hand ( his feet are out over the line - he is out and the ball is out as he has it in his possession) and secondly he has stepped out of the field of play to gain an advantage.( which under rule he shouldnt really have done to begin with)

Where can this be definatively shown in the rule book?

macadam · 11-06-2013 10:21pm

feargale wrote: »

A player kicks the football in an attempt to score. The ball bursts in transit before it crosses the goal line. The leather goes into the net and the bladder goes over the bar. You are the ref......?

It actually cannot happen now with the sewn ball but I do believe it happened in a Junior all ireland years ago and the Ref awarded both a goal and a point.
If it did happen I would award where ever the leather went, I think!!

feargale · 11-06-2013 11:15pm

macadam wrote: »

It actually cannot happen now with the sewn ball but I do believe it happened in a Junior all ireland years ago and the Ref awarded both a goal and a point.
If it did happen I would award where ever the leather went, I think!!

I heard it happened but thought it might be an old wives' tale ( or, in these politically correct times, the tale of a chronologically challenged spouse. ) I would have split the difference and awarded two points.

daniels.ducks · 12-06-2013 10:50pm

kala85 wrote: »

Player has the ball in his hand and steps over the sideline or the goal line. What happens here? What do you think? Is it a line ball / goal as appropriate or just play on??

player steps over the line to gain and advantage... i.e get around a player it's a free against him.
Take a goalkeeper catching the ball in the small rectangle, there are attackers surrounding him so he makes a dash for the corner flag. There is a player on the end line preventing him from his path. While still in the small rectangle he handpasses the ball over the opponents head and reclaims in after the bounce but while doing so steps over the end line to gain an advantage.
By the rules this is a foul but is it a penalty as he stepped over the line within the small rectangle so a technical foul in the small rectangle is a penalty?

Also to clear up the ball over the line conundrum the rule book states that the full ball must be over the line for it to be dead. If i'm shouldered over the line but my hand/ball stay inside the pitch it's play on

feargale · 13-06-2013 12:33am

daniels.ducks wrote: »

player steps over the line to gain and advantage... i.e get around a player it's a free against him.
Take a goalkeeper catching the ball in the small rectangle, there are attackers surrounding him so he makes a dash for the corner flag. There is a player on the end line preventing him from his path. While still in the small rectangle he handpasses the ball over the opponents head and reclaims in after the bounce but while doing so steps over the end line to gain an advantage.
By the rules this is a foul but is it a penalty as he stepped over the line within the small rectangle so a technical foul in the small rectangle is a penalty?

It's no penalty. If he were legitimately shouldered over the line it would be a 65. Ditto if he steps over it.

daniels,ducks wrote: »

Also to clear up the ball over the line conundrum the rule book states that the full ball must be over the line for it to be dead. If i'm shouldered over the line but my hand/ball stay inside the pitch it's play on

hand yes. Ball no.

macadam · 13-06-2013 6:57am

feargale wrote: »

It's no penalty. If he were legitimately shouldered over the line it would be a 65. Ditto if he steps over it.
hand yes. Ball no.

I'd say your wrong there, the goalkeeper cannot be touched in the small square he can only be challenged for the ball Rule 1.7, he also cannot step over a boundary line to gain an advantage Rule 1.9 and Rule 4.34, the foul is not in the small square it when he steps over the end line, Free Kick
1.9 Provided that he has at least one foot on the
ground, a player may make a shoulder to
shoulder charge on an opponent-
(a) who is in possession of the ball, or
(b) who is playing the ball, or
(c) when both players are moving in the
direction of the ball to play it.
When he is within the small rectangle, the
goalkeeper may not be charged but he may be
challenged for possession of the ball, and his
puck, kick or pass may be blocked. Incidental
contact with the goalkeeper while playing the
ball is permitted.
4.34 To deliberately go outside the boundary lines
to gain an advantage except as provided in
Rule 1.9

daniels.ducks · 13-06-2013 8:34am

macadam wrote: »

I'd say your wrong there, the goalkeeper cannot be touched in the small square he can only be challenged for the ball Rule 1.7, he also cannot step over a boundary line to gain an advantage Rule 1.9 and Rule 4.34, the foul is not in the small square it when he steps over the end line, Free Kick
1.9 Provided that he has at least one foot on the
ground, a player may make a shoulder to
shoulder charge on an opponent-
(a) who is in possession of the ball, or
(b) who is playing the ball, or
(c) when both players are moving in the
direction of the ball to play it.
When he is within the small rectangle, the
goalkeeper may not be charged but he may be
challenged for possession of the ball, and his
puck, kick or pass may be blocked. Incidental
contact with the goalkeeper while playing the
ball is permitted.
4.34 To deliberately go outside the boundary lines
to gain an advantage except as provided in
Rule 1.9

But he'a in the small rectangle when he steps over the line. I'm not sure but i'd see it as a technical foul occurring within the small rectangle so a penalty. Really harsh one to give though.

macadam · 13-06-2013 9:15pm

daniels.ducks wrote: »

But he'a in the small rectangle when he steps over the line. I'm not sure but i'd see it as a technical foul occurring within the small rectangle so a penalty. Really harsh one to give though.

The foul is when he steps over the line, therefore he is technically over the boundary line and not in the small square.

macadam · 27-06-2013 10:31pm

MOUTHGUARDS,
Whats the general opinion on Underage players coming onto the field with no gumshield, recently a ref walked away from an underage match because not one player on a team had a mouthguard, and I agree with him the Gaa sheet we received stated No Mouthguard= NoGame

Colm R · 11-09-2013 8:43am

Going to resurrect this thread again following the hurling final. I don't want to get into a who is right, who is wrong debate - just want to identify the rule, or if the rules are lacking.

Nash was taking a 21 meter free. Kelly, the Clare goalkeeper charged it down.

Taking a free in hurling has two parts:

- lifting the sliotar

- striking the sliotar

Nash lifted the ball high and for some distance forward - I don't think this breaks any rule. What do ye think?

Its arguable that Kelly left his goal line before Nash lifted the ball, but its neglible - I need to see a replay, but lets say he only left his goal line as Nash lifted the ball for the sake of argument - is this legal - I think it is because Nash had begun the process of striking the ball.

My understanding is that Kelly is entitled to run forward as far as he wants at the point that Nash lifts the sliotar. But he cannot touch the ball or the player until such a time as the free taker has finished striking the ball.

What do ye think?

zetecescort · 11-09-2013 9:00am

Colm R wrote: »

Going to resurrect this thread again following the hurling final. I don't want to get into a who is right, who is wrong debate - just want to identify the rule, or if the rules are lacking.

Nash was taking a 21 meter free. Kelly, the Clare goalkeeper charged it down.

Taking a free in hurling has two parts:

- lifting the sliotar

- striking the sliotar

Nash lifted the ball high and for some distance forward - I don't think this breaks any rule. What do ye think?

Its arguable that Kelly left his goal line before Nash lifted the ball, but its neglible - I need to see a replay, but lets say he only left his goal line as Nash lifted the ball for the sake of argument - is this legal - I think it is because Nash had begun the process of striking the ball.

My understanding is that Kelly is entitled to run forward as far as he wants at the point that Nash lifts the sliotar. But he cannot touch the ball or the player until such a time as the free taker has finished striking the ball.

What do ye think?

Argued this with friends afterwards. If players are allowed charge the freetaker why is this not done for normal frees? Or is it just 21m frees?

Don't think Nash broke any rule in how he lifted the ball, but did himself no favours IMO by rising it so high, stopped his momentum waiting for it to drop.

Colm R · 11-09-2013 9:06am

zetecescort wrote: »

Argued this with friends afterwards. If players are allowed charge the freetaker why is this not done for normal frees? Or is it just 21m frees?

Don't think Nash broke any rule in how he lifted the ball, but did himself no favours IMO by rising it so high, stopped his momentum waiting for it to drop.

Normally a free taker stands stationary over a ball, lifts and strikes very quickly, hence no point in charging down.

However, Kelly knew Nash was going to lift the ball forward, so began his own charge forward.

Being from Cork, you'd expect me to be biased against Kelly. But I don't think he did anything wrong and carried out a fine save, that said, he probably still feels it today

Is there anything in the rule book about this?

bo-sco · 11-09-2013 11:50am

Colm R wrote: »

Normally a free taker stands stationary over a ball, lifts and strikes very quickly, hence no point in charging down.

However, Kelly knew Nash was going to lift the ball forward, so began his own charge forward.

Being from Cork, you'd expect me to be biased against Kelly. But I don't think he did anything wrong and carried out a fine save, that said, he probably still feels it today

Is there anything in the rule book about this?

The rule book says players can't be within 20 metres until the ball is struck which would imply that what Kelly did was illegal.

But the rule book is flawed in that defenders have no choice in the case of a 21 yard free as if the striker advances more than a metre they are breaking the rule.

premierstone · 11-09-2013 1:08pm

Colm R wrote: »

Being from Cork, you'd expect me to be biased against Kelly. But I don't think he did anything wrong and carried out a fine save, that said, he probably still feels it today

The thing about it though is that Kelly was 6 yards from the line before Nash even lifted the ball, there is absolutely no doubt he broke the rules. How he defended the second '21 was the correct way, he moved off the line as soon as Nash had lifted the ball.

Squareball2010 · 11-09-2013 5:19pm

Colm R wrote: »

Going to resurrect this thread again following the hurling final. I don't want to get into a who is right, who is wrong debate - just want to identify the rule, or if the rules are lacking.

Nash was taking a 21 meter free. Kelly, the Clare goalkeeper charged it down.

Taking a free in hurling has two parts:

- lifting the sliotar

- striking the sliotar

Nash lifted the ball high and for some distance forward - I don't think this breaks any rule. What do ye think?

Its arguable that Kelly left his goal line before Nash lifted the ball, but its neglible - I need to see a replay, but lets say he only left his goal line as Nash lifted the ball for the sake of argument - is this legal - I think it is because Nash had begun the process of striking the ball.

My understanding is that Kelly is entitled to run forward as far as he wants at the point that Nash lifts the sliotar. But he cannot touch the ball or the player until such a time as the free taker has finished striking the ball.

What do ye think?

This is one that sparked plenty of debate on Sunday in the terrace and stands and on the Sunday Game later that night. Overall the consensus is the referee Gavin was in this case incorrect and the rules seem to point to this conclusion also.

The rule as it stands states -

4.17 (a) For an opposing player to be nearer than 20m
to the ball before a free puck is struck.

PENALTY FOR THE ABOVE FOULS - Free
puck 13m more advantageous than the
place of original puck - up to opponents’
20m line.

Now a couple of key issues - (obviously the free can be advanced any further so a retake would be the penalty)

1. Kelly was actually already a number of yards off his goal-line before the ball was even lifted by Nash - straight away causing an infringement and a foul.

2. Whether Kelly started on his line or not before the ball was lifted by Nash, by advancing off his line a number of yards towards the ball as it was lifted and in the air for the free BEFORE the ball is struck (not lifted) as is stated in the rule then it is indeed a foul.

3. Gavin realised his error and instructed Kelly for each and every one of the other 20m frees and penalty to stay on his line or it would be retaken.

Anyhow, Kelly did cause an infringement as he was not back the required 20m distance aka remaining on the line and as such the free should have been retaken and the keeper issued a warning to remain on his line or get he would be booked for challenging the authority of a match official but not obeying the referees instruction.

As a side note - you're right Nash does cleverly and sneakly gain extra yardage through his extravagant lift for a free/penalty and is nearly on the 13m line by the time he strikes it but there is no rule against it so it is fair play and in line with the rules as they stand. Recall the great DJ Carey was another man fond of the extra distance gained from such positions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSarXRxcYQc

Grudaire · 11-09-2013 6:13pm

The Rules state:

GAA Rules wrote:

For all free pucks, including penalties, the ball
may be struck with the hurley in either of two
ways:
(a) Lift the ball with the hurley at the first
attempt and strike it with the hurley.
(b) Strike the ball on the ground.

At what point does the strike occur in part (a)?

Is it at the start or the end or somewhere in the middle!?

I would argue that the ball is 'struck' as soons as it has left the ground, otherwise you could argue that:

The defenders and Goalie must go backwards, or at least be behind the goal line. (To not breach the 20m rule)
The attacker is in breach of rule 4.25 by strike the ball from closer to the goal than where the puck is to be taken.

(4.25 To advance the ball deliberately from the place at which a free puck or sideline puck is to be taken.
2.3 A penalty puck shall be taken at the centre
point of the 20m line and the semi-circular arc,)

bruschi · 11-09-2013 7:54pm

premierstone wrote: »

The thing about it though is that Kelly was 6 yards from the line before Nash even lifted the ball, there is absolutely no doubt he broke the rules. How he defended the second '21 was the correct way, he moved off the line as soon as Nash had lifted the ball.

absolutely factually incorrect. watch it again if you have to, but he wasnt anywhere near 6 yards off the line when Nash lifted the ball.

the debate on this is the strike. it says defenders have to be 20m away from the ball when it is struck, so who causes the foul then? the person who brings the ball forward to strike it? or the player who can not retreat back from the ball to keep the 20m?

there is a case to argue that the player taking the free causes the offence by bringing the ball forward to within 20m of the goal. but obviously the whole rule is a bit of an anomaly, and is clearly not defined to take into the modern game and way of taking frees like Nash does.

Squareball2010 · 11-09-2013 10:30pm

bruschi wrote: »

absolutely factually incorrect. watch it again if you have to, but he wasnt anywhere near 6 yards off the line when Nash lifted the ball.

the debate on this is the strike. it says defenders have to be 20m away from the ball when it is struck, so who causes the foul then? the person who brings the ball forward to strike it? or the player who can not retreat back from the ball to keep the 20m?

there is a case to argue that the player taking the free causes the offence by bringing the ball forward to within 20m of the goal. but obviously the whole rule is a bit of an anomaly, and is clearly not defined to take into the modern game and way of taking frees like Nash does.

Firstly factually incorrect that he was 6 yards off his line it may be but Kelly WAS a couple of yards off his line before the ball was struck...the Sunday Game and my eyesight proves this as I was sat directly behind the goal in the Davin Stand on Sunday!

Ok lads I think everyone is getting a little bit too bogged down with this strike issue and when is a free actually struck or as such taken. To me its obvious and the rule book would suggest the same that a free is not taken or struck until the ball is struck, fair point? I think so. NOT when the ball is lifted..if thats the case you could charge down any free in any position of the pitch which is foul play!

Another issue people are getting too bogged down is is the fact Nash sneaks an extra few yards with his strike, so what? DJ Carey and many others have often done the same and its not against the rules so whats the issue? Oh its that the players are not 20m back? This is to preserve the advantage to the forward player striking the ball. If he throws it forward Nashesque style before striking it and the players remain on the goal-line then there's no issue and no foul. Of course the players can't be 20m back in that instance...but you can't expect them to be....as long as they remain on the line no problem.

Now what the issue here is is that Kelly advanced from the line before the free was struck breaking the 20m and then proceeded to rush out towards Nash and illegitimately blocking the free. THIS is foul play! If Kelly remained on his line like every other 20m free or penalty in the game the rules were being adhered to and thus no issue. Brian Gavin realised he was wrong almost straight away after Nash roared in his face I'm guessing and proved this by instructing the keeper to remain on his line for every subsequent 20m free/penalty after that.

Ha I must admit its an intriguing discussion but would people agree with that interpretation? :cool:

Martin567 · 12-09-2013 8:29am

It is an interesting discussion and I will reiterate the point I made several times in the actual match thread as I believe this is a more appropriate place for it.

The rules badly need to be changed. They currently make no sense as they never envisaged the possibility of anyone doing what Anthony Nash is doing. Credit to him for pushing the rules to the limit but I think what he is doing is ludicrous. It should lead to a change at next year's Congress.

For me, there are two alternatives. The first is to make it illegal to throw the ball forward as far as he does. The second may be easier to enforce. Allow all the players on the line to rush forward the second he lifts the ball. It is completely unfair that Nash can advance 7 or 8m from the actual free position over 2 or 3 seconds while everyone else is forced to stand still on the line. This second option would have little effect on a more orthodox style like that of Joe Canning.

I hope something like the above is implemented soon as, to me, what happened last Sunday was a complete farce.

bruschi · 12-09-2013 8:48am

Squareball2010 wrote: »

Firstly factually incorrect that he was 6 yards off his line it may be but Kelly WAS a couple of yards off his line before the ball was struck...the Sunday Game and my eyesight proves this as I was sat directly behind the goal in the Davin Stand on Sunday!

Ok lads I think everyone is getting a little bit too bogged down with this strike issue and when is a free actually struck or as such taken. To me its obvious and the rule book would suggest the same that a free is not taken or struck until the ball is struck, fair point? I think so. NOT when the ball is lifted..if thats the case you could charge down any free in any position of the pitch which is foul play!

Another issue people are getting too bogged down is is the fact Nash sneaks an extra few yards with his strike, so what? DJ Carey and many others have often done the same and its not against the rules so whats the issue? Oh its that the players are not 20m back? This is to preserve the advantage to the forward player striking the ball. If he throws it forward Nashesque style before striking it and the players remain on the goal-line then there's no issue and no foul. Of course the players can't be 20m back in that instance...but you can't expect them to be....as long as they remain on the line no problem.

Now what the issue here is is that Kelly advanced from the line before the free was struck breaking the 20m and then proceeded to rush out towards Nash and illegitimately blocking the free. THIS is foul play! If Kelly remained on his line like every other 20m free or penalty in the game the rules were being adhered to and thus no issue. Brian Gavin realised he was wrong almost straight away after Nash roared in his face I'm guessing and proved this by instructing the keeper to remain on his line for every subsequent 20m free/penalty after that.

Ha I must admit its an intriguing discussion but would people agree with that interpretation? :cool:

I wouldnt. Firstly, why is it alright to give allowance to Nash to sneak a few yards, but not for the defenders to sneak a few yards? Cant have it both ways.

As I said above, the rules are the problem. And Martin points it out well too. They need changing.

As it stands, the defenders are causing a foul play but they can not do anything other than run away from the goal to prevent this. They are the ones required to keep 20m distance, but yet the person taking the free is the one who causes the distance to be less than 20m, not the defenders.

antoobrien · 12-09-2013 9:15am

Squareball2010 wrote: »

Firstly factually incorrect that he was 6 yards off his line it may be but Kelly WAS a couple of yards off his line before the ball was struck...the Sunday Game and my eyesight proves this as I was sat directly behind the goal in the Davin Stand on Sunday!

You'll want to get your eyesight tested again the squareball, you were fooled by Kelly going back and forth between the edge of the square and the goal line.

When Nash starting to approach the ball Kelly bolted and by the time the ball was lifted Kelly was almost stepping on the 6 yard line - as the screen capture below shows (best I can do off youtube):

bruschi · 12-09-2013 10:57am

antoobrien wrote: »

You'll want to get your eyesight tested again the squareball, you were fooled by Kelly going back and forth between the edge of the square and the goal line.

When Nash starting to approach the ball Kelly bolted and by the time the ball was lifted Kelly was almost stepping on the 6 yard line - as the screen capture below shows (best I can do off youtube):

or you could freeze it when Nash first touched the ball, not when up on his hurl.

he is a yard or 2 off the line, not 6 when Nash lifts the ball. the time Nash takes to lift, and then throw it up means if you run at him you will get close to him.

but it shows 2 faults with the rules, and both keepers maxed them both out.

antoobrien · 12-09-2013 11:02am

bruschi wrote: »

or you could freeze it when Nash first touched the ball, not when up on his hurl.

Nash hasn't actually touched the ball yet there (the hurl is behind rather than under the ball)

premierstone · 12-09-2013 12:58pm

bruschi wrote: »

absolutely factually incorrect. watch it again if you have to, but he wasnt anywhere near 6 yards off the line when Nash lifted the ball.

I never said he was, I said he had been on the 6 yard line before the ball was lifted and Nash was adressing it, this is against the rules, and when the ball was lifted he was still well off his line, again in breach of the rules.

Squareball2010 · 12-09-2013 4:13pm

antoobrien wrote: »

You'll want to get your eyesight tested again the squareball, you were fooled by Kelly going back and forth between the edge of the square and the goal line.

When Nash starting to approach the ball Kelly bolted and by the time the ball was lifted Kelly was almost stepping on the 6 yard line - as the screen capture below shows (best I can do off youtube):

Excellent work Anto but you're just reiterating mine and everyone else's point here....before the ball was struck (as per the rulebook which is important here not when the ball was lifted) Kelly is yards off his line and commits the offence. As you say yourself Kelly bolted as Nash approached the free aka was about 2 yards off his line before the ball was lifted. Thus the free should have been retaken - accept it, the referee was wrong in this instance and realised it by warning Kelly for every subsequent free from such distance. My eyesight isn't failing me just yet

Squareball2010 · 12-09-2013 4:26pm

bruschi wrote: »

I wouldnt. Firstly, why is it alright to give allowance to Nash to sneak a few yards, but not for the defenders to sneak a few yards? Cant have it both ways.

As I said above, the rules are the problem. And Martin points it out well too. They need changing.

As it stands, the defenders are causing a foul play but they can not do anything other than run away from the goal to prevent this. They are the ones required to keep 20m distance, but yet the person taking the free is the one who causes the distance to be less than 20m, not the defenders.

Q1 Why is it alright to allow Nash sneak a few yards? I'll tell you why, because the current rules ALLOW him to do so and have done for years - cue Christy Ring and DJ Carey. It's never been a problem before so why is it a problem now? I agree the rule probably needs reviewing but as they stand at present Nash played within the rules so technically not a problem in this instance.

Q2 Why not allow the defenders to sneak a few yards also? Because the current rules prohibit this and rightly so too but stating the defenders must be 20m back before the ball is struck. This preserves the advantage with the attacking team and rightly so. Here the defenders and goalkeeper MUST be on the goal line...its simple! Whether or not Nash hits it from the 20m line or sneaks a few yards....they MUST stay on the line, no exceptions. Kelly did not do this and as the current rules stand he broke one of them and committed the offence which everyone agrees by now days later.

Looking and implementing the current rules which is all we can do Nash did nothing wrong, Kelly did so lets stick to the facts not heresay.

I agree the rules could do with a review to prevent the free/penalty taker stealing extra yardage but until that is done then Nash is completely right to do and execute what is a very difficult skill to lift it that high with that distance and still generate ferocious power in the shot, Kelly is completely wrong to bolt out from his line and be 6m away from Nash by the time he strikes the ball.

As an aside and moving on from this issue, football next year sees the introduction of the public clock. One wonders why hurling doesn't see the same change? This would take a great deal of pressure and criticism from referees as we wouldn't have had the argument of whether a ref is right to add on an extra 30 seconds or not (which here he clearly was right to do so with Cork's time wasting on the sidelines).

Bring in the hooter like the ladies football!:pac:

A few GAA referee conundrums

Comments