HoganStand GAA Football and Hurling

National Forum

12 week ban for Cody?

(Oldest Posts First) - Go To The Latest Post

You need to Login to Post

Replying To ballydalane: "How can a punishment be applied consistently when the "offence" was completely different? Individual incidents should be judged on their own merits, not a "one size fits all" approach to handing out punishments. Football lads seem intent on importing their tattle-tale culture ("squealers" we used to call them in school) into hurling. TSG football coverage is now about pundits and fans (remember, Des Cahill always introduces the controversial section with "we've received a lot of texts and emails asking us to look at some incidents from the match.....", so ordinary football fans are at this craic too) trying to get players from rival counties suspended - and they want the same thing for hurling. Beyond pathetic. The thing I would say about hurling fans (note, not football fans who "follow the hurling", but fans for whom hurling is the number 1 sport) is that we know when a line has been crossed when we see it. We can't define it exactly, but we know when a player or manager has gone too far and deserves punishment. You won't get many hurling men looking for Cody's suspension. I note most calling for his suspension on this thread are non-hurling men." This is the entire point! DC got such a ban for something so small as that was just "the rule" regardless of how minimal the actual offence. What you are advocating for is exactly what people argued for in Connolly's defence! Liamwalkinstown (Dublin) - Posts: 8166 - 12/07/2017 14:34:47 2015615 Link
Replying To Liamwalkinstown: "This is the entire point! DC got such a ban for something so small as that was just "the rule" regardless of how minimal the actual offence. What you are advocating for is exactly what people argued for in Connolly's defence!" Liamwalkingstown is in the right here. The CCCC are a collection of clowns who react more to media coverage than to the referee's report, in spite of what they say. They have along, long history of it, stretching all the way back to Semplegate (and probably before that as well. It's high time the GAA cleaned up their sideline act. I have been at numerous matches where the linseman had to run along the inside of the pitch while doing his job because managers and assorted others were standing on the line. Why are the GAA tolerating this? Midleton (Cork) - Posts: 643 - 12/07/2017 15:37:04 2015658 Link
Replying To Midleton: "Liamwalkingstown is in the right here. The CCCC are a collection of clowns who react more to media coverage than to the referee's report, in spite of what they say. They have along, long history of it, stretching all the way back to Semplegate (and probably before that as well. It's high time the GAA cleaned up their sideline act. I have been at numerous matches where the linseman had to run along the inside of the pitch while doing his job because managers and assorted others were standing on the line. Why are the GAA tolerating this?" Exactly right Midleton Fact is that DC got a ban cos the SG/SKY/Newstalk went to town on him so they HAD to be seen to act Cody isnt getting a ban because none of the above made a deal of it so the appetite wasnt there to prosecute Yet when those who advocated DC'S ban justified it they said a rule is a rule is a rule regardless of the severity of the incident, but for some reason with Cody that doesnt apply............. HYPOCRITES Liamwalkinstown (Dublin) - Posts: 8166 - 12/07/2017 15:51:31 2015669 Link
Replying To Liamwalkinstown: "Exactly right Midleton Fact is that DC got a ban cos the SG/SKY/Newstalk went to town on him so they HAD to be seen to act Cody isnt getting a ban because none of the above made a deal of it so the appetite wasnt there to prosecute Yet when those who advocated DC'S ban justified it they said a rule is a rule is a rule regardless of the severity of the incident, but for some reason with Cody that doesnt apply............. HYPOCRITES" My point exactly. One rule for hurlers and another rule for footballers. It's not just Diarmuid Connolly but also Evan Comerford and Ryan Burns who have been subjected to the rigours of the rules and suspended . Those men cannot be looked in the eye and told that they have been treated fairly if Brian Cody is not made answerable for what happened on Saturday . Greengrass (Louth) - Posts: 6031 - 12/07/2017 16:45:16 2015697 Link
Replying To neverright: "Oh! come on arock, Connolly wasn't showing respect to the linesman (which you might suggest was fair enough since the linesman made a mistake). He broke the rule and has accepted the punishment. I don't think posters or media are doing him any favours by prolonging the discussion, or referencing the incident continually. Cody deserved a ban also, even though some might argue that he was simply pushing the linesman out of the way to attack McGrath. His behaviour was disgraceful and set an awful example to all the young people watching. Some other poster mentioned small handbags being involved but I think he was hallucinating." DC was not disrespecting anyone either he was right to protest and nor was Cody directing anything at the official. Precedents are being set by the media etc and the summer will be ruined with this nonsense. arock (Dublin) - Posts: 4896 - 12/07/2017 17:07:18 2015712 Link
According to Sean Moran in today's Irish Tmes, Brian Cody has been "given a clean bill of disciplinary health" in referee James Owen's report. There's a surprise !!! Greengrass (Louth) - Posts: 6031 - 12/07/2017 18:52:18 2015774 Link
Replying To Greengrass: "Here we go again . The old" hurling men know best and sure what would a football man about it anyway " refrain . Note as well the derogatory references to football supporters . The "holier than thou" attitude is alive and well in your post . The charge is "minor interference with a match official ". That is what happened. Brian Cody did in a minor way interfere with a match official. There is no difference between what Connolly and Cody did . Neither official felt it worthy of bringing it to the attention of the referee. Yet Connolly is serving a twelve week suspension . What any fair minded GAA person is interested in is will there be reference made in the referees report to the Cody incident . If there is no reference made then why the disparity beteeen Cody and Connolly? This has nothing to do with the " holier than thou, hurling people know when we have crossed the line " approach you advocate. It has to do with treating people consistently. By the way did Horgan cross the line on Sunday ?" "There is no difference between what Connolly and Cody did." Complete and utter, utter balderdash. ballydalane (Kilkenny) - Posts: 1246 - 12/07/2017 20:20:50 2015796 Link
some amount of hypocrites here. Blatant hypocrites Liamwalkinstown (Dublin) - Posts: 8166 - 12/07/2017 20:53:59 2015810 Link
Replying To ballydalane: ""There is no difference between what Connolly and Cody did." Complete and utter, utter balderdash." Really Ballydalan ? Ciaran Brannigan did not bring what happened between him and Diarmuid Connolly to the attention of the referee . He did not deem it to be worthy of reporting . The fourth official was the exact same in relation to his incident with Cody . The incident was not deemed to be worth reporting . Both Cody and Connolly put their hands on the officials concerned . Connolly is serving a twelve week ban . Cody is not . One rule for footballers and another rule for hurlers. Apologies for having the temerity to question a true hurling fan . I am after all only "a football fan who follows hurling" according to your definition of a real hurling fan. I've only been to 47 All Ireland senior hurling finals. By the way is "balderdash" a hurling word ? Would you also answer the question as to whether or not Horgan stepped over the line last Sunday ? Seeing as you are a real hurling fan I'd be obliged if you'd allow me to benefit from a real hurling fan's insight in to the game . Greengrass (Louth) - Posts: 6031 - 12/07/2017 21:49:42 2015833 Link
Replying To ballydalane: ""There is no difference between what Connolly and Cody did." Complete and utter, utter balderdash." Not so sure I'd agree with you there ballydalane. For me it's the same action, I just don't think either case warrants a suspension. To me, why one has resulted in a suspension and the other hasn't is all down to the differences in the way football people and hurling people view their games, and particularly the different mindsets which football pundits and hurling pundits tend to have. The SG pundits have huge influence -- way more than they should have. I would think it is very likely that referees wait until the pundits have their say before they submit their match reports. I doubt very much if the Connolly action would have made it into the referee's report at all if Spillane etc had not made a song and dance about it after the game.(clearly neither the referee nor the linesman had any issue with Connolly at the time of the incident since no card or no warning was issued to him when it happened). The football pundits went for the jugular, the referee hears the outrage later and the incident then appears in his report -- ergo Connolly gets a suspension. In the Cody incident, the match officials obviously found his action equally as non-offensive, but in this case they didn't have to add a complaint about it later since the SG hurling pundits circled the wagon and defended Cody and the vast majority of hurling people didn't have any great problem with his action anyway! PoolSturgeon (Galway) - Posts: 1903 - 12/07/2017 22:10:03 2015841 Link
Replying To PoolSturgeon: "Not so sure I'd agree with you there ballydalane. For me it's the same action, I just don't think either case warrants a suspension. To me, why one has resulted in a suspension and the other hasn't is all down to the differences in the way football people and hurling people view their games, and particularly the different mindsets which football pundits and hurling pundits tend to have. The SG pundits have huge influence -- way more than they should have. I would think it is very likely that referees wait until the pundits have their say before they submit their match reports. I doubt very much if the Connolly action would have made it into the referee's report at all if Spillane etc had not made a song and dance about it after the game.(clearly neither the referee nor the linesman had any issue with Connolly at the time of the incident since no card or no warning was issued to him when it happened). The football pundits went for the jugular, the referee hears the outrage later and the incident then appears in his report -- ergo Connolly gets a suspension. In the Cody incident, the match officials obviously found his action equally as non-offensive, but in this case they didn't have to add a complaint about it later since the SG hurling pundits circled the wagon and defended Cody and the vast majority of hurling people didn't have any great problem with his action anyway!" Very well said sturgeon. That's it in a nutshell. There was me difference between what Connolly and Cody did . Donal Og Cusack has also pointed out the difference between The Sunday Game hurling and football pundits in an interview tonight. Greengrass (Louth) - Posts: 6031 - 12/07/2017 22:32:27 2015852 Link
Replying To PoolSturgeon: "Not so sure I'd agree with you there ballydalane. For me it's the same action, I just don't think either case warrants a suspension. To me, why one has resulted in a suspension and the other hasn't is all down to the differences in the way football people and hurling people view their games, and particularly the different mindsets which football pundits and hurling pundits tend to have. The SG pundits have huge influence -- way more than they should have. I would think it is very likely that referees wait until the pundits have their say before they submit their match reports. I doubt very much if the Connolly action would have made it into the referee's report at all if Spillane etc had not made a song and dance about it after the game.(clearly neither the referee nor the linesman had any issue with Connolly at the time of the incident since no card or no warning was issued to him when it happened). The football pundits went for the jugular, the referee hears the outrage later and the incident then appears in his report -- ergo Connolly gets a suspension. In the Cody incident, the match officials obviously found his action equally as non-offensive, but in this case they didn't have to add a complaint about it later since the SG hurling pundits circled the wagon and defended Cody and the vast majority of hurling people didn't have any great problem with his action anyway!" I understand that BUT the response of the hurling fraternity is based on emotion and loyalty and NOT the rules. Regulations are there for a purpose whether we like them or not. The hurling camp CANNOT be allowed a get out clause EVERY time controversy arises based on heartfelt emotion. The Diarmuid Connolly incident WAS trivial BUT the rules state that physical contact, even minimum and deliberate or not, with officials carries at the minimum a 12 week ban. The CCCC HAD to make a ruling on the Connolly case based on the rules as they stand, just as they will have to on the Cody incident. Hurling is a tough sport BUT some dirty hits and strokes have gone unpunished over the past few years because the hurling pundits snarl, grrr and shout "manly" all the time. It's just not on. If Cody walks away unpunished for placing his hands on an official in an aggressive way, meant or not in the heat of a game, then Dublin will have EVERY right to cry foul, bias and unfairness. Ulsterman (Antrim) - Posts: 9703 - 13/07/2017 00:50:14 2015879 Link
Replying To Ulsterman: "I understand that BUT the response of the hurling fraternity is based on emotion and loyalty and NOT the rules. Regulations are there for a purpose whether we like them or not. The hurling camp CANNOT be allowed a get out clause EVERY time controversy arises based on heartfelt emotion. The Diarmuid Connolly incident WAS trivial BUT the rules state that physical contact, even minimum and deliberate or not, with officials carries at the minimum a 12 week ban. The CCCC HAD to make a ruling on the Connolly case based on the rules as they stand, just as they will have to on the Cody incident. Hurling is a tough sport BUT some dirty hits and strokes have gone unpunished over the past few years because the hurling pundits snarl, grrr and shout "manly" all the time. It's just not on. If Cody walks away unpunished for placing his hands on an official in an aggressive way, meant or not in the heat of a game, then Dublin will have EVERY right to cry foul, bias and unfairness." Don't think at all the response of the hurling fraternity is based on emotion. (I'm very unemotional about it anyway and I don't have any particular loyalty to Mr Cody!!!). Know I'll be accused of peddling a superiority viewpoint here again, but just think within hurling, issues are looked at in the broad. Football folk are all for, and always for, the application of the "letter of the law". Hurling folk are far more comfortable when " the spirit of the law" is applied. They take into account such things as intent , the scale of the misdemeanor, and whether the punishment fits the crime. The football mindset is like that of the guard who stops the motorist who is doing 54km in a 50m zone, and will always slap them with a 80 EUR fine and 4 penalty points. Hurling folk are more like the guard who in the same situation would stop the motorist and say " you were going too fast there...off with you now, but if I catch you again...." PoolSturgeon (Galway) - Posts: 1903 - 13/07/2017 07:52:54 2015902 Link
One element of the Connolly incident that is being overlooked was the reaction of the Carlow bench to Connolly push on brannigan with one or two of the Carlow back room team jumping up and down like jack in the boxes when it happened so there was a fuss made about it on the night.......compare to Cody incident , Mc Grath and his back room team said nothing, exchanged their words with Cody then turned their back and continued..... PaudieSull1 (Down) - Posts: 738 - 13/07/2017 08:45:34 2015914 Link
UM, well said buddy. I applaud your stance on this. Thank you for your sanity. (UM, do you think half the reason hurling never took off like football in Ulster is cos the hurling people are afraid to give ye lads sticks ;) ) Liamwalkinstown (Dublin) - Posts: 8166 - 13/07/2017 09:48:51 2015944 Link
Replying To Greengrass: "According to Sean Moran in today's Irish Tmes, Brian Cody has been "given a clean bill of disciplinary health" in referee James Owen's report. There's a surprise !!!" It is not a surprise as the hurling refs have a bit of common sense and use it, while most of the football refs are like kids seeking attention- there are exceptions though browncows (Meath) - Posts: 2342 - 13/07/2017 09:50:26 2015946 Link
Replying To browncows: "It is not a surprise as the hurling refs have a bit of common sense and use it, while most of the football refs are like kids seeking attention- there are exceptions though" Perhaps this is true. However, there seems to be a policy in hurling that you don't send a player off unless you really have to. Referees nearly seem to be afraid of the pundits (possibly an unfair assessment) in that its relatively rare (in my opinion) that the pundits agree with a sending off (I realise the Sunday Game pundits thought Horgan should have been sent off but the afternoon pundits didn't) and the referee's authority is undermined by this. A good example was when Horgan was sent off versus Limerick a few years ago, the storm the pundits kicked up seemed to rub off on the GAA who subsequently rescinded the red card on appeal (I personally thought the red card was justified but that's my opinion). Another example would be when Donal O'Grady of Limerick did the diving "tackle" on Henry Sheflin (I think) a few years ago to prevent him running through on goal. It was the hurling equivalent of the Sean Cavanagh "tackle" but O'Grady didn't get censured by the ref (it would have been his second yellow) or by the pundits. I disagree that football refs are attention seeking in the main and I feel try to apply the rules as they are outlined (whether successfully or not is up to individual interpretation. The recent Jamie Clarke black card seems to have very much divided opinion). I think hurling refs can do the opposite - they avoid making decisions in relation to sendings off to avoid pundit scrutiny later on as the company policy is that hurling is a "manly game" and the ref is likely to be criticised for any decision that flies in the face of this, even if it is the correct decision. Kurt_Angle (Dublin) - Posts: 567 - 13/07/2017 12:08:19 2016034 Link
Replying To Liamwalkinstown: "some amount of hypocrites here. Blatant hypocrites" The aggression is the biggest factor. Are you saying that if an player is in the tunnel before the game, trying to get past the ref and puts his hands on him to get past, that that requires a suspension? Look at the aggression in Connolly towards the official before the push - pointing and shouting in the linesman's face. The Cody contact was initiated by the official. https://www.balls.ie/gaa/diarmuid-connolly-push-linesman-366354 http://www.independent.ie/sport/gaelic-games/hurling/watch-could-brian-cody-face-ban-for-laying-his-hands-on-match-official-during-kilkennys-defeat-35910435.html Cully (Laois) - Posts: 375 - 13/07/2017 13:36:43 2016081 Link
Replying To Liamwalkinstown: "some amount of hypocrites here. Blatant hypocrites" Completely agree with you on that point. The silence is deafening here and in the Media. Wait until Monday, will the guns remain so. I seriously doubt it. Marse (Dublin) - Posts: 217 - 13/07/2017 21:45:33 2016276 Link
Replying To KK1926: "Liam and Condor Legion et al. Yes he should receive the 12 week ban. He broke the rule just like Connolly. But in Kilkenny we won't moan about it like some in Dublin. We'll be focusing on getting back into the hurling elite, working on our underage and checking out the club scene. We won't be bawling and feeling victimised and put upon like the whingefest from the capital. Many congrats to Waterford. Hugely deserved and all true hurling fans will wissh them well. Great to see Cork back too." well said sir. bulmccabe (Tyrone) - Posts: 361 - 13/07/2017 22:05:16 2016285 Link