Granted jimbo will say it's aimed dubs...

But looking at this rule outside the context of the game yesterday do ye think it's right that players send off can be replaced in extra time??

Hag_and_Cheese (Tipperary) - Posts: 6103 - 14/06/2010 22:00:40    677594

I disagree that you should be allowed to bring players on to replace players sent off in regular time, if you have a player or players sent off in regular time, well then that handicap should stand for any extra time as well. Extra time is not a new game, so if a team's player is stupid enough or unlucky enough to get himself send off in normal time, well then that should stand for the entire game including any extra time.

gilly0512 (Galway) - Posts: 1176 - 15/06/2010 09:08:28    677631

The rule is in place a while though, I don't think it is a recent rule.

As far as I am aware, extra time is seen as a tie breaker to the drawn game and as such, it is seen as a new game. The problem the rule throws up, is that if say for example a defender fouls an attacker right at the end of a game & stopping him score a winning score, and gets sent off, that player can be replaced in extra time, so where is the penalty for the team who did the foul?

slayer (Limerick) - Posts: 6627 - 15/06/2010 09:12:45    677635

This discussion came up with the St Galls All-Ireland club semi-final earlier in the year. Players red carded during the 70 cannot return to the field of play and yellow cards are carried over - but you can make as many changes as you want from your match squad, so you don't have to let guys carry over a yellow into extra time - just bench them. This is down to the amateur thing (the physical strain on non-professional athletes). At the same time, as with the St Galls match - if you can't use a one or two man advantage in normal time, you can hardly bitch about losing the game in extra-time.
At the end of the day, everyone knows the rules of the game.

pearsesabu (Antrim) - Posts: 663 - 15/06/2010 09:33:43    677657

i think that if you get a straight red card in normal time you shouldnt be allowed bring someone on
but if its for two yellow you should be able to

flame09 (Longford) - Posts: 246 - 15/06/2010 09:43:23    677669

Slayer - I think the rule has been in place since the GAA started playing extra-time. In your scenario - if a player fouls a player to prevent a winning score - if the player was carded there would have to have been a penalty or close in free awarded. That should be easy to convert and win the game anyway (i.e. there shouldn't be extra time anyway)?

pearsesabu (Antrim) - Posts: 663 - 15/06/2010 09:53:29    677676

the part i dont understand is that the player sent off is allowed to get replaced but if a player gets yellow in normal time it carries over to extra time. Does that make sense to anyone else?

dstuction (Donegal) - Posts: 1209 - 15/06/2010 10:01:51    677683

If its level in the dying seconds of extra-time a player can foul an attacker who could potentially score or set up a score and get red carded and the game goes to a replay what should happen then wise guys? Its the same thing The offending gets to start the replay with full team? I think the rule is correct its a 70 minute game and you suffer the consequences within that period of time. If the team that carries the advantage during normal time just accept they failed to capitalise on their advantage.

pigonastick (Dublin) - Posts: 487 - 15/06/2010 10:05:57    677689

but really if a player is sent off it allows a team an extra substitution thus a fresh player.... The rule has been there donkeys years, but in my view if your penalised in normal time you should be penalised in extra time too.

Hag_and_Cheese (Tipperary) - Posts: 6103 - 15/06/2010 16:14:36    678167

You should be punished in that it costs you a sub. The dubs should only have been able to bring on 3 subs in extra time instead of another 5

Twisted_Menace (Kerry) - Posts: 113 - 15/06/2010 16:29:58    678195

Never fully agreed with this rule think if you have a player sent off he should be gone for the rest of the game including extra time
but this is not a rule that has just came into congress it been around for years and has been the same for every team throughtout the years

dubshurling7 (Dublin) - Posts: 1017 - 15/06/2010 16:50:57    678228

Twisted_Menace
County: Kerry
Posts: 15

678195
You should be punished in that it costs you a sub. The dubs should only have been able to bring on 3 subs in extra time instead of another 5

I'd have to agree with you there, that is a very fair proposal.

RUBADUB (Dublin) - Posts: 477 - 15/06/2010 16:56:27    678238

pearsesabu

it came up in the club final, whereby the Galls player was allowed to be replaced. Yet when Gary Sice got a second yellow he was sent off - one yellow carried over but one red didn't.
I have no real problem with the rule, but its another example of players and officials not having a clue whats going to happen. Don't know whether there's going to be extra time, what rules apply now, or this. It gets very frustrating to watch, and annoying.

abhainn (Galway) - Posts: 1000 - 15/06/2010 17:14:41    678275

Agree very stupid rule as it give dublin fresh legs on sunday as well , this rule is about a long time now.

Dellboypolecat (Tyrone) - Posts: 15069 - 15/06/2010 17:20:30    678289

I could be wrong Dell but didn't Wexford get the chance to bring on fresh legs too?

Jackeen (Dublin) - Posts: 4097 - 15/06/2010 17:35:54    678317

Jackeen
County: Dublin
Posts: 758

678317


My point is the 2 players dublin had sent off can be replaced and the team still gets full qoute of subs like wexford but dublin to me got extra 2 players because of this rule. Now this is wrong for any team to still allowed to use the same subs but have men sent off get extra because replacing men sent off is not used as subs number.

Dellboypolecat (Tyrone) - Posts: 15069 - 15/06/2010 17:40:10    678323

its a silly rule i think but dublin didn't do anything wrong..just benifited from the bad rule

Dubsfan08 (Dublin) - Posts: 619 - 15/06/2010 18:58:03    678452

It is a stupid rule and i would be expecting a motion from Wexford at congress next year which i reckon would have full support from all counties.

Louth Gael (Louth) - Posts: 1227 - 15/06/2010 19:11:47    678466

I have to say that I never was a fan of this rule which has been around for years. For those who argue that its a 70 minute game and you should only suffer the consequences within said period then why not keep it a 70 min game and do away with Extra Time? To say that the 20 mins extra is effectively a new game is rubbish and any loss of player(s) by a team should continue until the conclusion of the game on that day - teams shouldn't be rewarded for indiscipline.

Offside_Rule (Antrim) - Posts: 4058 - 15/06/2010 19:18:02    678475

Dell I get ye now. It doesn't make any sense alright.

Jackeen (Dublin) - Posts: 4097 - 15/06/2010 19:24:23    678484