Seeing as the County Board Sec is also the team sec then we should have nothing at all to worry about.
Surely he did check this out and probably has it in writing from the top- he must have it- he has to have it.
If not- he should walk and its as simple as that, no excuses whatsoever.
When the subs thing happened last year it was understandable as we did not have such an experienced person as we have now acting as team sec. Apart from that even last year clarification was sought on the line before making the last substitution and in the end it was deemed all above board. This has to be above board too. Anything else is unthinkable considering the experience of the person involved.
Offaly could be in trouble for fielding Ken Casey v Longford
-
Bord na Mona man
- All Star
- Posts: 4092
- Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 11:34 am
- Club: Clara
It seems Offaly needlessly rolled the dice on this one. Just like the six subs issue v Kildare when a sub was unnecessarily brought when the game was wrapped up.
Why take the chance, even if you believe you could be in the right?
At this stage staying out of Division 4 is my main concern. Hopes of winning the Division 2 title have been forgotten.
Remember what happened when Mike Mac got us relegated to Division 2 in hurling 3 years ago. The legacy of that misfortune is still with us!
An unlucky defeat to Roscommon or Clare and it could see us in the bottom 4 and in the land Tommy Cooper!
Why take the chance, even if you believe you could be in the right?
At this stage staying out of Division 4 is my main concern. Hopes of winning the Division 2 title have been forgotten.
Remember what happened when Mike Mac got us relegated to Division 2 in hurling 3 years ago. The legacy of that misfortune is still with us!
An unlucky defeat to Roscommon or Clare and it could see us in the bottom 4 and in the land Tommy Cooper!
Casey
From the posts from the 'rulebook' it appears that there was never a need for concern at all in this matter unless I am missing something (always possible). It seems to state in black and white what can be done.
The only questions left for me are:
1. Did everyone involved know that Casey was up on a 'category 2 charge'? If not then rolling the dice on this is putting it mildy...more like Russian Roulette.
2. Based on what exactly is Longford objecting? It does not appear that there is an objection to be had.
The only questions left for me are:
1. Did everyone involved know that Casey was up on a 'category 2 charge'? If not then rolling the dice on this is putting it mildy...more like Russian Roulette.
2. Based on what exactly is Longford objecting? It does not appear that there is an objection to be had.
Apparantly this isn't as simple as that. From what i heard...and i wasn't at the game, Kasey was sent off for a second yellow. No suspension, but after being sent off he verbally abused the ref. The ref then reported this, so it's not as simple as the category II or category IV affair...then again i could have been mis-informed.
-
Lone Shark
- All Star
- Posts: 5394
- Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 5:21 pm
- Club: Ferbane
- Location: Roscommon
- Contact:
Having looked at the rules cited here, it does appear that we might yet get away with this. I use the term "get away with" very deliberately. It's really disappointing to see our county reduced to these kind of shennanigans. For all the proud history of a county like Cork, you look them square in the eye and they know that they have thieved several titles due to manipulating the rule book. As for our far from beloved neighbours to the North, one lousy provincial title, and even that will always be tainted by the Rory O'Connell stuff.
No matter what else went on, you could always go back the county board's suspension of McManus in 2002 when they could have tried to weasel out of it - but they didn't. That meant as much to me as a lot of our big wins.
If we try and argue that Casey deserved to play after aggressively going after a ref a week previously, then we're no better than the worst of them.
No matter what else went on, you could always go back the county board's suspension of McManus in 2002 when they could have tried to weasel out of it - but they didn't. That meant as much to me as a lot of our big wins.
If we try and argue that Casey deserved to play after aggressively going after a ref a week previously, then we're no better than the worst of them.
Still Don't Get it
After reading the posts by The Bare Biffo and Treasurer I don't understand the problem.
Tom, the suspension should be independent of the sending off and should have no bearing on the infraction.
Lone Shark, I don't think we are getting away with anything here. I agree that integrity is key, but it does not look like we've done anything wrong. If Offaly decide to hold themselves to a stricter code than the rules call for that is an option, but consistency in application will be important and could be very painful.
Longford, having lodged the objection, deserve the courtesy of having somone get back to them regarding their objection at the earliest possible opportunity to let them know that it has no merit and why (by reading the rules to them if necessary) so we can all move on.
Tom, the suspension should be independent of the sending off and should have no bearing on the infraction.
Lone Shark, I don't think we are getting away with anything here. I agree that integrity is key, but it does not look like we've done anything wrong. If Offaly decide to hold themselves to a stricter code than the rules call for that is an option, but consistency in application will be important and could be very painful.
Longford, having lodged the objection, deserve the courtesy of having somone get back to them regarding their objection at the earliest possible opportunity to let them know that it has no merit and why (by reading the rules to them if necessary) so we can all move on.
I was at the U21 game and Casey was verbally abusive towards the referee,but no way did he push,shove or hit him. He just was a bit excessive in his use of words after the sending off and this seems to be the opinion of the commitee that suspended him. The county sec obviously believed that it was a cat 2 offence and correctly deemed him elligible to play against Longford - as the rules state , no arguments here........
-
the bare biffo
- All Star
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 10:37 am
- Location: Nth Roscommon
No, I can't see how there is any getting away with anything here. The rules seem to have been followed correctly and Ken Casey and the U-21's will be punished for his indiscretion.
It is interesting though to see that professional journalists may not be any different to many of us here in that they are happy enough to shoot off their fingers in the interest of a story without doing any basic and simple research. All part of the fun I guess.
It is interesting though to see that professional journalists may not be any different to many of us here in that they are happy enough to shoot off their fingers in the interest of a story without doing any basic and simple research. All part of the fun I guess.
"The ball may pass, but the man, never."
-
OffalyManAway
- Senior
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 12:34 am
- Location: North Offaly
the bare biffo, I take you comment. fair enough.
But why then did the county board not issue a quick statement on Tuesday outlining the facts , i.e. that this was a Cat 2 offence, officially communicated to them as such, and therefore Casey was eligible. End of Story, no drama.
In my opinion, at best this constitutes bad media management by the county board and at worst, sheer ineptitude.
But why then did the county board not issue a quick statement on Tuesday outlining the facts , i.e. that this was a Cat 2 offence, officially communicated to them as such, and therefore Casey was eligible. End of Story, no drama.
In my opinion, at best this constitutes bad media management by the county board and at worst, sheer ineptitude.
-
Muck Savage
- All Star
- Posts: 307
- Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 10:07 pm
- Location: CA USA
Lads as far as I'm concerned this is something that the GAA at HQ need to fix. We're going with were we right or wrong but the GAA need to be able to make a clear call on this by the Tuesday after it happens at the latest. We talk of players playing so many competitions etc. then they have to have a set up where a call is made straight away. Senior, U21 and College games are par for most of these lads and they'll play at least one of these games each week. Why can't the GAA have a group that make the call on Mondays or Tuesdays for all inter county competitions no matter what the age group and also take into account college games. Could he have played a College game last week if needed?
This is very troubling to me that a player who is told by the county board (I assume) he is clear to play and now could face up to 6 months on the line. The player doesn't have the time or the clout to find this information out by himself and is relying on the County Board (this is one of the things they are there for). If they can't figure this out with Croke Park how can a player. I'd like to see the GPA step in here, it is suppose to be a group to help out players, and force quicker calls for something like this from Croke Park by looking for a response within 2 days of the event.
This is very troubling to me that a player who is told by the county board (I assume) he is clear to play and now could face up to 6 months on the line. The player doesn't have the time or the clout to find this information out by himself and is relying on the County Board (this is one of the things they are there for). If they can't figure this out with Croke Park how can a player. I'd like to see the GPA step in here, it is suppose to be a group to help out players, and force quicker calls for something like this from Croke Park by looking for a response within 2 days of the event.
-
the bare biffo
- All Star
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 10:37 am
- Location: Nth Roscommon
-
Bord na Mona man
- All Star
- Posts: 4092
- Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 11:34 am
- Club: Clara