Excellent point Ron, and well summed up previously by MPOH. More than any previous case that I can remember, the "natural" outcome of this dispute seems very clear to me - at worst Offaly get a fine and the Fourth Official gets an up-to-date copy of the Rulebook for future reference.Ron wrote:If they couldn't decide after 2 hours last night whether or not a rule had been broken then how in the name of god are sideline officials and management expected to know straight away.
There's obviously a lack of clarity in the rules somewhere but thats not the fault of the Offaly team, so why should they be punished for it?
5 or 6 subs ??????????????????
-
the bare biffo
- All Star
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 10:37 am
- Location: Nth Roscommon
Elvis Malone
I have been looking at the little avatar pic on The Biff's posts this long while and wondering what a Roy Malone likeness was doing swinging a hurl. It was only last week when the wife came up behind me and says whats Elvis doing in an Offaly jersey that it hit me.
Doh.
Doh.
"The ball may pass, but the man, never."
-
Bord na Mona man
- All Star
- Posts: 4049
- Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 11:34 am
- Club: Clara
Avatar
This link may help to understand the origins of my avatar. I cant claim any credit for its creation or the epic musical masterpiece lnked to it. I just liked the picture when I first came across it and kept a copy.
As regards my own likeness, definitely more like Elvis (of the Costello variety).
But BnMm has grown a little older since HIS pic was taken.
As regards my own likeness, definitely more like Elvis (of the Costello variety).
But BnMm has grown a little older since HIS pic was taken.
Central Council
Just heard from a friend that it was announced on 5:30 Sports News that the Central Council mtg has been brought forward to tonight, as any replay (if required) would be played this coming weekend.
-
Lone Shark
- All Star
- Posts: 5378
- Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 5:21 pm
- Club: Ferbane
- Location: Roscommon
- Contact:
-
the bare biffo
- All Star
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 10:37 am
- Location: Nth Roscommon
Replay
If they did order a replay this Saturday, would KK still be banned ?
"The ball may pass, but the man, never."
There was an interesting piece in today's Indo where it was stated by Martin Breheny that of five GAA officials he contacted, three thought Offaly had not broken any rule. I just can't understand on what grounds could Offaly NOT have broken this rule. Of course, I hope there's a doubt in the rule which I am not aware of. There must be judging by the views of those leading officials (who were not named).
But the main point I want to make here is that IF Offaly made a genuine error, which was more to do with paperwork than anything else, surely it would be within the power of Leinster Council to fine Offaly and allow them play the Leinster semi-final versus Wexford. In my opinion, any other outcome would be a disgrace.
But after the farcical hurling situation the previous Sunday, I'm slow to depend on Leinster Council to make the correct decision.
But the main point I want to make here is that IF Offaly made a genuine error, which was more to do with paperwork than anything else, surely it would be within the power of Leinster Council to fine Offaly and allow them play the Leinster semi-final versus Wexford. In my opinion, any other outcome would be a disgrace.
But after the farcical hurling situation the previous Sunday, I'm slow to depend on Leinster Council to make the correct decision.
Re: Central Council
I've seen nothing about this on any sports bulletins?The Biff wrote:Just heard from a friend that it was announced on 5:30 Sports News that the Central Council mtg has been brought forward to tonight, as any replay (if required) would be played this coming weekend.
-
Bord na Mona man
- All Star
- Posts: 4049
- Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 11:34 am
- Club: Clara
Looks like the tide is turning in Offaly's favour.
I'm not sure if anyone, apart from a small few extremists in Kidlare want to see the result overturned.
================================================
If Offaly lose out it would be ultimate sporting travesty
Wednesday May 31st 2006
IT may sound complicated, but it's actually quite simple. If Offaly receive anything other than a token reprimand for Sunday's tiny, technical error over the use of subs, then the GAA may as well erect a 'For Sale' sign outside Croke Park and close down the entire nationwide operation.
After 122 years in existence, the GAA is allowing itself to be completely out-muscled by bureaucracy on steroids.
It has reached a stage where the fundamentals on which all sports are based have become totally corrupted in the GAA by the bewildering range of rule interpretations.
We've had some crazy examples already this year, led by the decision to overturn suspensions imposed in the aftermath of the Tyrone-Dublin brawlfest in Omagh last February.
The disciplinarians responsible would argue that technically they had no choice but to uphold the players' appeals. If that's the case, then the rulebook is in a bigger mess than is generally realised.
Lifting the suspensions sent out a clear signal that bad behaviour on the field is acceptable, provided the investigative waters are subsequently muddied.
Now, as the GAA heads into its showpiece summer season when it should be vigorously marketing and promoting the big championship action, it's fire-fighting against another outbreak of self-induced embarrassment.
So, to the facts of the Offaly-Kildare case. Offaly appear to have made a small error in the paper work involving ordinary subs and 'blood' subs. When Pascal Kellaghan returned after being treated for a cut, Offaly should have declared that he was resuming and that James Coughlan, who came on while Kellaghan was being treated, was continuing as a permanent sub for Trevor Phelan.
Instead, Kellaghan was classified as a permanent sub for Phelan which raised questions about Coughlan's subsequent status. Confused?
Aren't we all, but according to the rule, Offaly probably made an error. It's important to use the word 'probably' because there's no unanimity on the matter.
And so to the real substance of the issue. Did Offaly gain any advantage from the mistake? No. Did they use more than five personnel as subs in the course of the game? No.
So where's the problem? They allegedly breached a rule that's so complex in its wording that even experienced GAA administrators can't agree on its interpretation.
Vastly experienced Leinster Council officials met in conclave on Monday night but had to concede defeat before asking the Central Council for a ruling.
Now, if the main men in a provincial Council find it impossible to figure out a rule, what chance have team mentors who are faced with a split decision in the hothouse atmosphere of Croke Park on a big championship day?
Even if Offaly did breach the rule, their offence is very much at the lower end of the scale and should be dealt with through a small fine. Ordering a re-fixture or, worse still, forfeiture of the game would be the ultimate sporting travesty.
The realities are as follows: Offaly used 20 players (which is permissible) and they won the game by three points despite playing with 14 men for much of the second half. In terms of the fixture, that should be the definitive verdict.
In public relations terms, it's a disaster for the GAA, not least among its own membership who have grown increasingly weary of rows and controversies over technicalities.
Granted, some of the rules are written in such vague wording as to be virtually unfathomable. However, there's a bigger problem. In a new age where everything is challenged, the spirit of any rule seems to mean nothing.
Kildare people would prefer to see a nuclear reactor built on the Curragh than get a second chance
Never mind that our Johnny punched an opponent off the ball in full view of everybody. Yes, but did the referee word his report correctly? He didn't? Thank God for that loophole.
Kildare were victims of an injustice a few years ago when they were docked league points after a mistake over the use of blood subs in a game against Sligo. It was a case of the punishment not fitting the crime, so they must understand how Offaly feel now.
The Offaly-Kildare affair will dominate the GAA headlines all week when, in reality, it should be seen for what it is, a nonsense over names on a slip of paper. Hopefully, commonsense will prevail and Offaly will be allowed proceed to the semi-final.
As for Kildare, most of the GAA people I know from the county would prefer to see a nuclear reactor built on the Curragh than get a second chance in a Leinster championship game that was lost on the pitch.
Martin Breheny
I'm not sure if anyone, apart from a small few extremists in Kidlare want to see the result overturned.
================================================
If Offaly lose out it would be ultimate sporting travesty
Wednesday May 31st 2006
IT may sound complicated, but it's actually quite simple. If Offaly receive anything other than a token reprimand for Sunday's tiny, technical error over the use of subs, then the GAA may as well erect a 'For Sale' sign outside Croke Park and close down the entire nationwide operation.
After 122 years in existence, the GAA is allowing itself to be completely out-muscled by bureaucracy on steroids.
It has reached a stage where the fundamentals on which all sports are based have become totally corrupted in the GAA by the bewildering range of rule interpretations.
We've had some crazy examples already this year, led by the decision to overturn suspensions imposed in the aftermath of the Tyrone-Dublin brawlfest in Omagh last February.
The disciplinarians responsible would argue that technically they had no choice but to uphold the players' appeals. If that's the case, then the rulebook is in a bigger mess than is generally realised.
Lifting the suspensions sent out a clear signal that bad behaviour on the field is acceptable, provided the investigative waters are subsequently muddied.
Now, as the GAA heads into its showpiece summer season when it should be vigorously marketing and promoting the big championship action, it's fire-fighting against another outbreak of self-induced embarrassment.
So, to the facts of the Offaly-Kildare case. Offaly appear to have made a small error in the paper work involving ordinary subs and 'blood' subs. When Pascal Kellaghan returned after being treated for a cut, Offaly should have declared that he was resuming and that James Coughlan, who came on while Kellaghan was being treated, was continuing as a permanent sub for Trevor Phelan.
Instead, Kellaghan was classified as a permanent sub for Phelan which raised questions about Coughlan's subsequent status. Confused?
Aren't we all, but according to the rule, Offaly probably made an error. It's important to use the word 'probably' because there's no unanimity on the matter.
And so to the real substance of the issue. Did Offaly gain any advantage from the mistake? No. Did they use more than five personnel as subs in the course of the game? No.
So where's the problem? They allegedly breached a rule that's so complex in its wording that even experienced GAA administrators can't agree on its interpretation.
Vastly experienced Leinster Council officials met in conclave on Monday night but had to concede defeat before asking the Central Council for a ruling.
Now, if the main men in a provincial Council find it impossible to figure out a rule, what chance have team mentors who are faced with a split decision in the hothouse atmosphere of Croke Park on a big championship day?
Even if Offaly did breach the rule, their offence is very much at the lower end of the scale and should be dealt with through a small fine. Ordering a re-fixture or, worse still, forfeiture of the game would be the ultimate sporting travesty.
The realities are as follows: Offaly used 20 players (which is permissible) and they won the game by three points despite playing with 14 men for much of the second half. In terms of the fixture, that should be the definitive verdict.
In public relations terms, it's a disaster for the GAA, not least among its own membership who have grown increasingly weary of rows and controversies over technicalities.
Granted, some of the rules are written in such vague wording as to be virtually unfathomable. However, there's a bigger problem. In a new age where everything is challenged, the spirit of any rule seems to mean nothing.
Kildare people would prefer to see a nuclear reactor built on the Curragh than get a second chance
Never mind that our Johnny punched an opponent off the ball in full view of everybody. Yes, but did the referee word his report correctly? He didn't? Thank God for that loophole.
Kildare were victims of an injustice a few years ago when they were docked league points after a mistake over the use of blood subs in a game against Sligo. It was a case of the punishment not fitting the crime, so they must understand how Offaly feel now.
The Offaly-Kildare affair will dominate the GAA headlines all week when, in reality, it should be seen for what it is, a nonsense over names on a slip of paper. Hopefully, commonsense will prevail and Offaly will be allowed proceed to the semi-final.
As for Kildare, most of the GAA people I know from the county would prefer to see a nuclear reactor built on the Curragh than get a second chance in a Leinster championship game that was lost on the pitch.
Martin Breheny
-
Bord na Mona man
- All Star
- Posts: 4049
- Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 11:34 am
- Club: Clara
31 May 2006
Offaly are ‘in the clear’
By Brendan O’Brien and Darragh O’Conchuir
THE Offaly sub controversy may have stumped some of the GAA’s best brains up until now, but barrister Aaron Shearer is adamant that Offaly are ‘in the clear’.
Shearer played corner-forward on the Na Fianna team ordered to replay a Leinster Club Championship semi-final against Sarsfields five years ago when they fielded one sub too many and claims that the wording of the rule in question is wrong.
Because there is an element of doubt over the rule, Shearer explained that it should be those responsible for drafting it (the GAA) and not the team under the microscope (Offaly) who should suffer the consequences.
“The way the rule was drafted (see panel), it strikes me that part 1 is meant to be read in conjunction with part 2 and 3 of the rule, but they haven’t drafted it that way. They all stand alone as far as I can see,” said the Dublin-based barrister.
“It shouldn’t be a grey area — if they had drafted the rule properly — but it seems to me that they haven’t.
“Just on a strict interpretation of the rule, it strikes me that Offaly are in the clear.
“I don’t think there should be (a replay). There might be, but I don’t think there should be.”
Shearer’s assessment backs up the claims made by Pierce Freaney, assistant to the fourth official last Sunday, as well as some senior GAA officials who believe the case against Offaly would not have a leg to stand on if it went as far as the DRA.
As it is, the Leinster Council have referred the matter to Central Council after a two-hour meeting in Portlaoise on Monday night failed to come to a definitive verdict.
Central Council will meet this Saturday and give their interpretation of the rule and the Leinster Council will apply that interpretation at a specially convened meeting of their own later that evening at six o’clock.
That should see the controversy solved before the All-Ireland qualifier draw the next evening, but the football calendar would still face a prospective upheaval if Kildare were to appeal any decision to the DRA.
The indications on Monday were that they had no desire to replay the match and county chairman Syl Merrins rejected claims yesterday that they had in fact lodged an appeal against the result of the game last Sunday.
The Nurney clubman is adamant that Kildare have no wish to see Offaly turfed out of the championship and says the county was only represented at Monday night’s Leinster Council meeting at the invitation of the Council and had not requested to be in attendance.
Merrins is however keen that the rule in relation to blood substitutions is cleared up once and for all, as he feels that there have been too many situations in recent times that have led to confusion.
Kildare teams have suffered negative results as a result of ‘six subs controversies’ in the past, but others, such as the Cork footballers in the 2002 Munster final, have escaped censure.
“Kildare have not objected to the result.
“We were invited by Leinster Council to the meeting (on Monday night), we didn’t look for it. Leinster Council asked our view on it and we gave it.
“Our view is that Offaly used six subs and we explained how we came to that view.
“We’re not saying ‘we want this match’, but if the rule is breached and it is not dealt with, it will have serious implications down the line, in all games.
“If one blood sub is misused, you could have numerous subs being used.”
While accepting that Offaly had acted in good faith, having checked with the sideline officials at the time, Merrins says that the GAA power-brokers must clear this issue up once and for all.
“We made the point that, in the case of Kildare, we had such problems with six subs before and the onus was on us to get the situation clarified. There was the Sligo situation (in 2002) when we got relegated (in the league) because we lost the two points.
“There was the Westmeath v Kildare (Leinster SHC tie last year, where Westmeath used six subs, but the result remained unchanged).
“Then you had Na Fianna using six subs against Sarsfields (in the Leinster clubs SFC semi-final in 2001). Sarsfields didn’t want to win the game that way, they offered a replay and lost. It probably cost them the Leinster title.”
Earlier yesterday, Leinster Council secretary Michael Delaney echoed Merrin’s thoughts that, regardless of Kildare’s intentions, this was an issue that needed to be addressed once and for all.
He also explained the reasoning behind the Council’s failure to make a judgement themselves.
“The situation was that both counties came in and they both made compelling arguments. Kildare made the argument that Offaly used six subs. Offaly said ‘no, we used five’. They both used the rule book to back up their cases.
“It so happens that there is, I suppose you call it a small grey area in the blood substitution rule. When we looked at it, we were divided on it so we said it’s only the Central Council that can interpret our rules and, by a happy coincidence, there’s a Central Council meeting on Saturday.
“No matter what decision we made last night, the other side was going to appeal. If we ruled in favour of Offaly, Kildare would have appealed and vice versa.
“To short circuit that we decided we’d go to Central Council, ask them to interpret the rule and that should be the end of the story.”
Offaly are ‘in the clear’
By Brendan O’Brien and Darragh O’Conchuir
THE Offaly sub controversy may have stumped some of the GAA’s best brains up until now, but barrister Aaron Shearer is adamant that Offaly are ‘in the clear’.
Shearer played corner-forward on the Na Fianna team ordered to replay a Leinster Club Championship semi-final against Sarsfields five years ago when they fielded one sub too many and claims that the wording of the rule in question is wrong.
Because there is an element of doubt over the rule, Shearer explained that it should be those responsible for drafting it (the GAA) and not the team under the microscope (Offaly) who should suffer the consequences.
“The way the rule was drafted (see panel), it strikes me that part 1 is meant to be read in conjunction with part 2 and 3 of the rule, but they haven’t drafted it that way. They all stand alone as far as I can see,” said the Dublin-based barrister.
“It shouldn’t be a grey area — if they had drafted the rule properly — but it seems to me that they haven’t.
“Just on a strict interpretation of the rule, it strikes me that Offaly are in the clear.
“I don’t think there should be (a replay). There might be, but I don’t think there should be.”
Shearer’s assessment backs up the claims made by Pierce Freaney, assistant to the fourth official last Sunday, as well as some senior GAA officials who believe the case against Offaly would not have a leg to stand on if it went as far as the DRA.
As it is, the Leinster Council have referred the matter to Central Council after a two-hour meeting in Portlaoise on Monday night failed to come to a definitive verdict.
Central Council will meet this Saturday and give their interpretation of the rule and the Leinster Council will apply that interpretation at a specially convened meeting of their own later that evening at six o’clock.
That should see the controversy solved before the All-Ireland qualifier draw the next evening, but the football calendar would still face a prospective upheaval if Kildare were to appeal any decision to the DRA.
The indications on Monday were that they had no desire to replay the match and county chairman Syl Merrins rejected claims yesterday that they had in fact lodged an appeal against the result of the game last Sunday.
The Nurney clubman is adamant that Kildare have no wish to see Offaly turfed out of the championship and says the county was only represented at Monday night’s Leinster Council meeting at the invitation of the Council and had not requested to be in attendance.
Merrins is however keen that the rule in relation to blood substitutions is cleared up once and for all, as he feels that there have been too many situations in recent times that have led to confusion.
Kildare teams have suffered negative results as a result of ‘six subs controversies’ in the past, but others, such as the Cork footballers in the 2002 Munster final, have escaped censure.
“Kildare have not objected to the result.
“We were invited by Leinster Council to the meeting (on Monday night), we didn’t look for it. Leinster Council asked our view on it and we gave it.
“Our view is that Offaly used six subs and we explained how we came to that view.
“We’re not saying ‘we want this match’, but if the rule is breached and it is not dealt with, it will have serious implications down the line, in all games.
“If one blood sub is misused, you could have numerous subs being used.”
While accepting that Offaly had acted in good faith, having checked with the sideline officials at the time, Merrins says that the GAA power-brokers must clear this issue up once and for all.
“We made the point that, in the case of Kildare, we had such problems with six subs before and the onus was on us to get the situation clarified. There was the Sligo situation (in 2002) when we got relegated (in the league) because we lost the two points.
“There was the Westmeath v Kildare (Leinster SHC tie last year, where Westmeath used six subs, but the result remained unchanged).
“Then you had Na Fianna using six subs against Sarsfields (in the Leinster clubs SFC semi-final in 2001). Sarsfields didn’t want to win the game that way, they offered a replay and lost. It probably cost them the Leinster title.”
Earlier yesterday, Leinster Council secretary Michael Delaney echoed Merrin’s thoughts that, regardless of Kildare’s intentions, this was an issue that needed to be addressed once and for all.
He also explained the reasoning behind the Council’s failure to make a judgement themselves.
“The situation was that both counties came in and they both made compelling arguments. Kildare made the argument that Offaly used six subs. Offaly said ‘no, we used five’. They both used the rule book to back up their cases.
“It so happens that there is, I suppose you call it a small grey area in the blood substitution rule. When we looked at it, we were divided on it so we said it’s only the Central Council that can interpret our rules and, by a happy coincidence, there’s a Central Council meeting on Saturday.
“No matter what decision we made last night, the other side was going to appeal. If we ruled in favour of Offaly, Kildare would have appealed and vice versa.
“To short circuit that we decided we’d go to Central Council, ask them to interpret the rule and that should be the end of the story.”
-
Bord na Mona man
- All Star
- Posts: 4049
- Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 11:34 am
- Club: Clara
Re: Central Council
Where do I advertise for a new "friend"? He overheard this in a shop, doesn't know which station it was, ...... and I have to agree with "offaly" that I didn't hear anything similar on any subsequent broadcasts.offaly wrote:I've seen nothing about this on any sports bulletins?The Biff wrote:Just heard from a friend that it was announced on 5:30 Sports News that the Central Council mtg has been brought forward to tonight, as any replay (if required) would be played this coming weekend.
Apologies for passing this mis-information on.
