National Forum

McGeeney gets 3 month ban!

(Oldest Posts First) - Go To The Latest Post


Replying To Soma:  "In situations like Davys the more serious offence is dealt with which is why he got a 8 week suspension. You might disagree with the rulebook but it is clear how they determined the length of each suspension. They are policing exactly as laid out in the rulebook yet people are complaing about a lack of consistency, its bizarre stuff."
If you are correct (and I have no reason to doubt it) then the big problem seems to be that the CCC don't communicate their decisions properly. One would imagine they set out their reasons but obviously those reasons are not being communicated to the GAA community at large and so it seems to people that there are inconsistencies when maybe there aren't any.

PoolSturgeon (Galway) - Posts: 1904 - 26/04/2017 20:10:08    1982995

Link

Replying To SaffronDon:  "does the rule book state that the cccc can pick and chose which games they decide to take action on?"
No it doesn't, I don't know why you think it might. Your original post claimed the punishments issued by the CCCC were inconsistent. I was just clarifying that they were entirely consistent with the rulebook, the incidents being punished were just different.

Soma (UK) - Posts: 2630 - 26/04/2017 21:04:35    1983007

Link

Replying To Damothedub:  "Ban McGeeny , Ban Davy , Ban Connolly , ever since the ban on foreign sports we haven't been allowed to let go, we love a good ban"
you're dead right. we've gone ban mad. No more, should be banned that's what I say

mhunicean_abu (Monaghan) - Posts: 1044 - 26/04/2017 21:12:55    1983010

Link

Although you could make a case that a few words from McGeeney could be more intimidating than Davy's pitch invasion : ) I'd be making for the exits alright; McGeeney does that cage fighting stuff in his spare time doesn't he? I'm reminded of when Barry McGuigan was asked if he'd fight Marvin Hagler and he replied: "I'd fight him anytime - if they gave me a hatchet"

essmac (Tyrone) - Posts: 1141 - 26/04/2017 21:30:07    1983013

Link

Replying To Soma:  "No it doesn't, I don't know why you think it might. Your original post claimed the punishments issued by the CCCC were inconsistent. I was just clarifying that they were entirely consistent with the rulebook, the incidents being punished were just different."
when you have a high profile game like the league final which was televised, packed with incidents that weren't picked up by the officials and no action was taken by the cccc. But a much lower profile game in division 3 between Armagh and Antrim takes place they are all over it like dung flies. That is inconsistency.

SaffronDon (Antrim) - Posts: 2386 - 27/04/2017 09:15:48    1983066

Link

Replying To SaffronDon:  "when you have a high profile game like the league final which was televised, packed with incidents that weren't picked up by the officials and no action was taken by the cccc. But a much lower profile game in division 3 between Armagh and Antrim takes place they are all over it like dung flies. That is inconsistency."
No it isn't but I get the impression you are very determined to have a moan so carry on. In one game there were incidents missed by match officials, nobody found guilty and no punishment. In 2 other games (Davy and McGeeney) there were incidents reported by match officials, both managers found guilty and both handed the minimum sentence set out in the rule book for the rule broken. It really is straightforward.

Soma (UK) - Posts: 2630 - 27/04/2017 10:15:35    1983075

Link

Replying To Soma:  "No it isn't but I get the impression you are very determined to have a moan so carry on. In one game there were incidents missed by match officials, nobody found guilty and no punishment. In 2 other games (Davy and McGeeney) there were incidents reported by match officials, both managers found guilty and both handed the minimum sentence set out in the rule book for the rule broken. It really is straightforward."
All I am going to say on the matter is, if there going to start banning managers for mouthing to assistants then the games in trouble it always happens.

I was at the game and were i think it happened was two antrim men were kicking lumps out of an Armagh man and mc geeney ran over and shouted at mc quillan to do something i dont know what he said but it was obvious in that incident that any manager in the GAA or soccer would do this as it was a bad tempered game and he is trying to protect his players.

Whats the chances joe mc quillan reffing armagh v down at the marshes lol...... Ahh well least it opens up the whole us against them scenario for the summer no interviews or nothing id say ;)

credit_crunch (Armagh) - Posts: 57 - 27/04/2017 10:51:17    1983080

Link

Replying To Soma:  "No it isn't but I get the impression you are very determined to have a moan so carry on. In one game there were incidents missed by match officials, nobody found guilty and no punishment. In 2 other games (Davy and McGeeney) there were incidents reported by match officials, both managers found guilty and both handed the minimum sentence set out in the rule book for the rule broken. It really is straightforward."
yea you've just highlighted an inconsistency but you don't seem to grasp the fact that it is one. Taking no action on incidents that have been missed by the ref is not following rules. Mattie Donnelly gets a suspension for raising his hands, which is fair enough, but when Philly McMahon hits his opponent with a closed fist in a more serious incident and nothing is done, that is inconsistency. why is that so hard for you to understand?

SaffronDon (Antrim) - Posts: 2386 - 27/04/2017 11:05:55    1983086

Link

Replying To SaffronDon:  "yea you've just highlighted an inconsistency but you don't seem to grasp the fact that it is one. Taking no action on incidents that have been missed by the ref is not following rules. Mattie Donnelly gets a suspension for raising his hands, which is fair enough, but when Philly McMahon hits his opponent with a closed fist in a more serious incident and nothing is done, that is inconsistency. why is that so hard for you to understand?"
Mattie Donnelly was suspended for throwing a punch after the final whistle I thought? Philly McMahon landed a punch while making a tackle. I'd say that is a fairly significant difference. If players have not been banned this year for throwing a punch after the final whistle that the referee saw happen then that would be inconsistent. There is much wrong with the GAA disciplinary process but none of what has been discussed here seems inconsistent.

Soma (UK) - Posts: 2630 - 27/04/2017 11:44:17    1983099

Link

Replying To Soma:  "Mattie Donnelly was suspended for throwing a punch after the final whistle I thought? Philly McMahon landed a punch while making a tackle. I'd say that is a fairly significant difference. If players have not been banned this year for throwing a punch after the final whistle that the referee saw happen then that would be inconsistent. There is much wrong with the GAA disciplinary process but none of what has been discussed here seems inconsistent."
without nit picking over the severity of both punches, we have an instance were one player got suspended and another got immunity, for throwing punches. Does that seem fair?

SaffronDon (Antrim) - Posts: 2386 - 27/04/2017 12:46:13    1983114

Link

Replying To icehonesty:  "Ye are all off yere heads. Abusing a linesman is way worse than what David Fitzgerald did. 12 weeks for abusing a match official is about right."
I agree, I know what he said to the linesman, the ban is deserved.

Tom1916 (Armagh) - Posts: 2001 - 27/04/2017 12:49:09    1983115

Link

what did he say tom?

kavvie (Clare) - Posts: 505 - 27/04/2017 13:08:29    1983121

Link

Replying To Soma:  "Mattie Donnelly was suspended for throwing a punch after the final whistle I thought? Philly McMahon landed a punch while making a tackle. I'd say that is a fairly significant difference. If players have not been banned this year for throwing a punch after the final whistle that the referee saw happen then that would be inconsistent. There is much wrong with the GAA disciplinary process but none of what has been discussed here seems inconsistent."
You would know fishing season is open.

gotmilk (Fermanagh) - Posts: 4971 - 27/04/2017 13:10:14    1983122

Link

Listen by the letter of the law he got what he deserved but I think it is the inconsistency of the whole thing is what is annoying people.

Putting davies situation to one side for the moment. How many times during the year do we see a manger shouting at the ref or sideline official? I would say almost every game?

So why take this sort of action now??

Seems very strange to me.

Wally (Tyrone) - Posts: 913 - 27/04/2017 13:30:03    1983134

Link

Replying To gotmilk:  "You would know fishing season is open."
No fishing at all, it all seems very clear. Colm Collins got a 12 week ban last year for a minor physical altercation with a linesman, that too was the minimum punishment that could have been given.

Soma (UK) - Posts: 2630 - 27/04/2017 14:10:55    1983148

Link

Replying To kavvie:  "what did he say tom?"
I'm censored for saying what he said - just shows how bad it is!!

Tom1916 (Armagh) - Posts: 2001 - 27/04/2017 14:29:20    1983157

Link

Replying To kavvie:  "what did he say tom?"
I'm censored for saying what he said - just shows how bad it is!!

Tom1916 (Armagh) - Posts: 2001 - 27/04/2017 14:40:55    1983161

Link

I would assume that the inconsistency comes from what is actually written in the referrers match report. Would guess the refs report stated that Davy entered the field of play and had an altercation with an opposing player, where as in Kieran McGeeney case the ref must have cited full verse of what it is alleged was said. Now questioning the ability of a ref to see and questions marks over their parentage are standard procedure at most matches. But we must remember without the refs there couldn't be any games so they must be respected. Perhaps if they got more respect then we might actually get a better standard of ref in the sport.... the ccc are fairly consistent in that they deal with what is in a referees report and this is way many incidents that we witness at on the TV aren't dealt with as the ref didn't include any mention of them in their report. The only time trial by media (Joe Duffy) actually was carried out was in 1996 when Meath & Mayo players were suspended after the game.

anto_meath (Meath) - Posts: 108 - 27/04/2017 14:51:28    1983165

Link

Lot of rubbish comparing bans on here. Saffron as u said urself we don't know what was said to the linesman therefor cannot compare to Davy's ban. IMO it is about time verbal abuse was taken seriously. Level of abuse at matches from underage to adults is scandalous (in fairness the higher the level the better the behaviors usually!).

Antrim county board got abuse for identifying a player that threw a punch.....unbelievable! They should be congratulated (presuming they id'd the right lad!). Would be nice if thuggery was eliminated from gaa.

Why are some instances of foul play not followed up on ...................i'm guessing (i don't know) but i would imagine the ccc or whoever monitors this are doing it in their spare time and may not be the most diligent. If it is highlighted on TV they have to react. Is that fair ....absolutely not. However the answer is not letting the thug off it is by resourcing the CCC to do their job better.

Mayonman (Galway) - Posts: 1833 - 27/04/2017 14:59:08    1983169

Link

Replying To Mayonman:  "Lot of rubbish comparing bans on here. Saffron as u said urself we don't know what was said to the linesman therefor cannot compare to Davy's ban. IMO it is about time verbal abuse was taken seriously. Level of abuse at matches from underage to adults is scandalous (in fairness the higher the level the better the behaviors usually!).

Antrim county board got abuse for identifying a player that threw a punch.....unbelievable! They should be congratulated (presuming they id'd the right lad!). Would be nice if thuggery was eliminated from gaa.

Why are some instances of foul play not followed up on ...................i'm guessing (i don't know) but i would imagine the ccc or whoever monitors this are doing it in their spare time and may not be the most diligent. If it is highlighted on TV they have to react. Is that fair ....absolutely not. However the answer is not letting the thug off it is by resourcing the CCC to do their job better."
The Antrim board provided the players name verbally, he was then cleared at a hearing. The county board then sent it in writing and didnt provide the player with any representation for his appeal. These players bust their gut for months on end for their county and adk for little in return and this is the treatment they receive from their own board for their efforts? its a disgrace and it wouldnt be tolerated anywhere else either.

For some reason the cccc decided to enforce the suspension the second time round. This is another inconsistency. Why does the player first get cleared when identified verbally and then when a follow up identification arrives in writing, they decide to enforce the suspension? what part of the rule book differnciates verbal and written communication?

I have to take issue with you brandishing GAA players as thugs. Yes, there are many unsavoury incidents that happen on a football field in the heat of battle. Is it right? no. But it is present in every field sport in the world and has been since time immemorial. Pressure and tensions are always at fever pitch and it is only natural that it boils over from time to time. It does not mean that our players are spiteful and malicious when they get caught up in these incidents. If you dont understand that then you've probably never played the game.

SaffronDon (Antrim) - Posts: 2386 - 27/04/2017 16:34:01    1983199

Link