Bad vibe after All Ireland Senior Football Final?

Donnielighto

Past30Now wrote: »

Given that a player was concussed after the incident, then it doesn't really qualify as a fair shoulder. Clearly there was more contact than shoulder to shoulder. The fact that the aggressor came of worse doesn't make it any less dangerous.

Shoulder was fine, one of the hardest fair tackles ive seen at intercounty level in a long time, great to see. Knock to the head and concussion is after the fact stuff though, you dont judge on that, just on the initial action.

jack presley

Godge wrote: »

O'Gara, now that is an interesting one. Not sure how that injury occurred but he is clearly taken out late in the build-up to the second goal having made his pass. Wasn't the first time that Mayo went in late or engaged in third-man tackles in the game.

Wasn't O'Gara's injury a hamstring? If so, probably not as a result of aggression.

wirelessdude01

How can soft tissue injury be as a result of aggression? Hammers can go at any time. Really scraping the bottom with that comment.

yop

Godge wrote: »

Seeing as the referee, the media and posters such as yourself have painted Dublin as the aggressors, it is actually quite strange to see how many of those so-called aggressors suffered as a result of their aggression. By my count, Mannion, O'Gara, O'Carroll, McCauley, O'Sullivan, McMahon all suffered injuries during the game, mustn't pay to be an aggressor?

O'Gara, now that is an interesting one. Not sure how that injury occurred but he is clearly taken out late in the build-up to the second goal having made his pass. Wasn't the first time that Mayo Dublin went in late or engaged in third-man tackles in the game.

IFTFU

sid waddell

O'Gara got his injury stretching for the ball seconds before Dublin's second goal when he was in a battle with Keith Higgins to try and get his hand to Paul Flynn's long pass. You can see him writhing on the ground. It was entirely accidental.

wirelessdude01

sid waddell wrote: »

O'Gara got his injury stretching for the ball seconds before Dublin's second goal when he was in a battle with Keith Higgins to try and get his hand to Paul Flynn's long pass. You can see him writhing on the ground. It was entirely accidental.

I suppose next we will hear that Zippy blew him a kiss and that sort of passive aggression caused it.

PRAF

Funnily enough, I think the GAA will soon need to do something about the so called 'hard but fair' challenges. The problem with those is that when the players get bigger with better training / nutrition / etc, the impacts of those challenges increases and so does the risk of serious injury.

Players shouldn't be allowed go into those challenges in a reckless fashion. A shoulder should be about knocking someone off their stride, bumping them over the sideline, etc. It shouldn't be about trying to absolutely pulverise them. Now you can't and shouldn't ever take the physicality out of the GAA. However, I'd actually agree with the yellow that Rory O'Carroll got on Sunday.

jack presley

PRAF wrote: »

Funnily enough, I think the GAA will soon need to do something about the so called 'hard but fair' challenges. The problem with those is that when the players get bigger with better training / nutrition / etc, the impacts of those challenges increases and so does the risk of serious injury.

Players shouldn't be allowed go into those challenges in a reckless fashion. A shoulder should be about knocking someone off their stride, bumping them over the sideline, etc. It shouldn't be about trying to absolutely pulverise them. Now you can't and shouldn't ever take the physicality out of the GAA. However, I'd actually agree with the yellow that Rory O'Carroll got on Sunday.

Isn't there a contradiction there? You don't want the physicality taken out of the game but anyone who does a physical but legal challenge should get a yellow card?

PRAF

jack presley wrote: »

Isn't there a contradiction there? You don't want the physicality taken out of the game but anyone who does a physical but legal challenge should get a yellow card?

Not really. Nobody wants to see physicality taken out of the game. However, excessive and reckless challenges do need to be discouraged.

Other sports are doing it too. In rugby, a player cannot just pickup and slam an opponent down anyway they like. Spear tackles are a red card offence. In soccer, the tackle that gets the ball and then follows through and takes out the man is now illegal. Both rugby and american football are starting to examine collissions which are legal now in terms of the impact they are having on rates of concussion.

wirelessdude01

Issue will be determining what is and isn't a physical challenge. Sure don't a lot of players/managers/analysts say that the tackle is the one thing that is ruining gaelic football, or the lack of a real definition.

Donnielighto

PRAF wrote: »

Not really. Nobody wants to see physicality taken out of the game. However, excessive and reckless challenges do need to be discouraged.

Other sports are doing it too. In rugby, a player cannot just pickup and slam an opponent down anyway they like. Spear tackles are a red card offence. In soccer, the tackle that gets the ball and then follows through and takes out the man is now illegal. Both rugby and american football are starting to examine collissions which are legal now in terms of the impact they are having on rates of concussion.

you cant compare spear tackles to rory ocarrol though, thats just ridiculous. Rugby has much bigger hits it is just the head ones really that cause issue. If you're on the field you are either big enough to take the hit or quick enough to avoid it.

jack presley

PRAF wrote: »

Not really. Nobody wants to see physicality taken out of the game. However, excessive and reckless challenges do need to be discouraged.

Other sports are doing it too. In rugby, a player cannot just pickup and slam an opponent down anyway they like. Spear tackles are a red card offence. In soccer, the tackle that gets the ball and then follows through and takes out the man is now illegal. Both rugby and american football are starting to examine collissions which are legal now in terms of the impact they are having on rates of concussion.

But the O'Carroll incident on Sunday was shoulder to shoulder. Players are getting bigger and stronger so unless you ban the shoulder tackle, there's always going to be the risk of the follow through causing a concussion. You couldn't really have it that shoulders are ok as long as you only go in at 75% or whatever. Either they're in or they're out and if they're out then you're taking a big part of the physicality out of the game which is something you said you didn't want to happen

wirelessdude01

Lads go back to the Harte/Cunniffe challenge in the semi. Totally legit shoulder yet Harte had to go off. If one of the players is anyway not concentrating or expecting the challenge then these kinda things can happen. In relation to ROC challenge on Sunday his shoulder was just a little high as Varley was stooping down/off balance and he kinda got the side of his head a little. Nothing malicious, was a free but maybe not a yellow.

Godge

jack presley wrote: »

Wasn't O'Gara's injury a hamstring? If so, probably not as a result of aggression.

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

How can soft tissue injury be as a result of aggression? Hammers can go at any time. Really scraping the bottom with that comment.

sid waddell wrote: »

O'Gara got his injury stretching for the ball seconds before Dublin's second goal when he was in a battle with Keith Higgins to try and get his hand to Paul Flynn's long pass. You can see him writhing on the ground. It was entirely accidental.

Have a look at the video. He has already made the knock-down in the air and as he comes down the Mayo defender goes into him from behind and in attempting to land safely he does his hamstring.

So yes, foul play can result in soft tissue injury. He beat the Mayo defender in the air to the ball, got fouled after the ball was gone, landed awkwardly and got injured. Higgins made little or no attempt to play the ball.

sid waddell

jack presley wrote: »

Yeah I know. I'm just curious as to whether it was 1 of the 36 that Sid included in his count. He did watch the game more than once

For what it's worth I thought the O'Carroll shoulder was a marginal call but probably fair, although he did get very slightly above Varley. It was mainly shoulder to shoulder but the force he was coming with meant he slid up over the top of Varley's shoulder and towards the head. It was certainly a genuine attempt at a legal tackle, although I'm aware that that's pretty much irrelevant in determining whether it was a foul or not.

So a fair shoulder for me, but I can understand how some people would have called it as a foul.

listermint

PRAF wrote: »

Not really. Nobody wants to see physicality taken out of the game. However, excessive and reckless challenges do need to be discouraged.

Other sports are doing it too. In rugby, a player cannot just pickup and slam an opponent down anyway they like. Spear tackles are a red card offence. In soccer, the tackle that gets the ball and then follows through and takes out the man is now illegal. Both rugby and american football are starting to examine collissions which are legal now in terms of the impact they are having on rates of concussion.

Your examples from other sporting codes bear ZERO similarity to a shoulder tackle.

Id gather you know that now having read them back. Its pretty poor if you were trying to back up your point.

PRAF

Donnielighto wrote: »

you cant compare spear tackles to rory ocarrol though, thats just ridiculous. Rugby has much bigger hits it is just the head ones really that cause issue. If you're on the field you are either big enough to take the hit or quick enough to avoid it.

What's ridiculous is trying to claim that I made a direct comparison between a shoulder challenge in GAA and a spear tackle in rugby. I didn't. I included the spear (as well as a fairly normal tackle in soccer which you ignored) as an example to illustrate that there is a limit to the 'hard but fair' argument. It is up to the rulemakers in each sport as well as the refs that police them) to determine where those limits are. The ref decided it was a yellow and I agree with him on that.

The rulemakers need to continually review the rules and determine if they need to be updated. This happens in every sport. When the rules were originally devised an average shoulder to shoulder challenge probably involved two guys about 5 foot 9, weighing about 10 stone, colliding into eachother from about 3 yards apart. Nowadays it could be a 6 foot 4, 15 stone collossus coming at you at full pelt from 10 yards away. The impacts and the potential damage have increased. As such, it is only reasonable in my opinion that the rulemakers and refs look at this.

listermint

PRAF wrote: »

What's ridiculous is trying to claim that I made a direct comparison between a shoulder challenge in GAA and a spear tackle in rugby. I didn't. I included the spear (as well as a fairly normal tackle in soccer which you ignored) as an example to illustrate that there is a limit to the 'hard but fair' argument. It is up to the rulemakers in each sport as well as the refs that police them) to determine where those limits are. The ref decided it was a yellow and I agree with him on that.

The rulemakers need to continually review the rules and determine if they need to be updated. This happens in every sport. When the rules were originally devised an average shoulder to shoulder challenge probably involved two guys about 5 foot 9, weighing about 10 stone, colliding into eachother from about 3 yards apart. Nowadays it could be a 6 foot 4, 15 stone collossus coming at you at full pelt from 10 yards away. The impacts and the potential damage have increased. As such, it is only reasonable in my opinion that the rulemakers and refs look at this.

Because there was no big irish man prior to 2013..... jesus.....

sid waddell

Godge wrote: »

Have a look at the video. He has already made the knock-down in the air and as he comes down the Mayo defender goes into him from behind and in attempting to land safely he does his hamstring.

So yes, foul play can result in soft tissue injury. He beat the Mayo defender in the air to the ball, got fouled after the ball was gone, landed awkwardly and got injured. Higgins made little or no attempt to play the ball.

With respect, that's nonsense. It was a 50-50 ball, the type of which you see dozens of in matches. O'Gara used his strength and height to beat Higgins to it. There was no foul and no attempt to foul.

Slattsy

This. Thread. Is. Quality.

PRAF

listermint wrote: »

Your examples from other sporting codes bear ZERO similarity to a shoulder tackle.

Id gather you know that now having read them back. Its pretty poor if you were trying to back up your point.

Are you saying that a tackle is legit under all circumstances as long as it is shoulder to shoulder? If your son or daughter was playing a game and someone twice their size ran 50 yards and creamed them with a shoulder, knocking them out, and maybe causing them to lose a few teeth would you still be saying that it was a legit tackle?

The concept of excessive force has been introduced in soccer to discourage the use of previously legit tackles where the man takes the ball first and then follows through and takes the man. The concept of reckless challenges which endanger other players is already in place in the GAA whether you like it or not.

Just to clarify, I AM NOT SAYING THAT RORY O'CARROLL's CHALLENGE WAS THE SAME AS A SPEAR TACKLE, I am merely setting out the reasons why I think a yellow card was justified.

jack presley

PRAF wrote: »

If your son or daughter was playing a game and someone twice their size ran 50 yards and creamed them with a shoulder, knocking them out, and maybe causing them to lose a few teeth would you still be saying that it was a legit tackle?

If my son or daughter were playing senior football, then yes it would still be a legal tackle as long as it was shoulder to shoulder.

mordeith

PRAF wrote: »

Are you saying that a tackle is legit under all circumstances as long as it is shoulder to shoulder? If your son or daughter was playing a game and someone twice their size ran 50 yards and creamed them with a shoulder, knocking them out, and maybe causing them to lose a few teeth would you still be saying that it was a legit tackle?

If they couldn't see a fella charging at em from 50 yards away they'd deserve to get a pasting from a shoulder.

premierstone

Godge wrote: »

Have a look at the video. He has already made the knock-down in the air and as he comes down the Mayo defender goes into him from behind and in attempting to land safely he does his hamstring.

So yes, foul play can result in soft tissue injury. He beat the Mayo defender in the air to the ball, got fouled after the ball was gone, landed awkwardly and got injured. Higgins made little or no attempt to play the ball.

Hey carefull will ya, I had just put on my nice clean shirt for Arthurs Day and you made me go and dribble coke out of my noe I was laughing so hard, jaysus I hope your either wumming or still drunk from the celebrations!

PRAF

jack presley wrote: »

If my son or daughter were playing senior football, then yes it would still be a legal tackle as long as it was shoulder to shoulder.

Out of interest why did you say senior football? Should the same rules not apply to all the grades?

Listen, in no way am I saying that we should take the physicality out of the game. I personally hate the nancy boy antics that go on in soccer. Pathetic to see grown men writhe around in mock agony when someone nudges them. For the most part, the GAA has got the balance right.

However, having played the game for 20 odd years I know that there are some limitations in the rule book which can be exploited. Hell, I've done it myself more than once. The shoulder challenge is fine 99% of the time but there are some instances where I do think it should be deemed a foul or a yellow. In hurling, one of the worst examples is the overhead pull where some players use it as free reign to try to break their opponents hand (although this is one I never engaged in myself).

I am in favour of refs being able to use common sense to determine if someone has overstepped the rules and used excessive force or deliberately / recklessly endangered an opponent.

premierstone

PRAF wrote: »

In hurling, one of the worst examples is the overhead pull where some players use it as free reign to try to break their opponents hand (although this is one I never engaged in myself).

When has anyone ever had their had broken in an instance like you have described?

mordeith

PRAF wrote: »

In hurling, one of the worst examples is the overhead pull where some players use it as free reign to try to break their opponents hand (although this is one I never engaged in myself).

I'm not sure where you played hurling but from the age of 12 we were told to put the hurley up either behind your hand it you were going up to catch a ball. Anyone who sticks their hand up witouth protecting it is bound to come out of it a few broken fingers (as well as a lesson learned).

Past30Now

Godge wrote: »

Seeing as the referee, the media and posters such as yourself have painted Dublin as the aggressors, it is actually quite strange to see how many of those so-called aggressors suffered as a result of their aggression. By my count, Mannion, O'Gara, O'Carroll, McCauley, O'Sullivan, McMahon all suffered injuries during the game, mustn't pay to be an aggressor?

O'Gara, now that is an interesting one. Not sure how that injury occurred but he is clearly taken out late in the build-up to the second goal having made his pass. Wasn't the first time that Mayo went in late or engaged in third-man tackles in the game.

I haven't painted Dublin as the aggressors. I'm a Dub season ticket holder and long term supporter. Rory was the aggressor in the incident in which he was concussed. You have taken my point and extrapolated it to suit your argument incorrectly.

Past30Now

Donnielighto wrote: »

Shoulder was fine, one of the hardest fair tackles ive seen at intercounty level in a long time, great to see. Knock to the head and concussion is after the fact stuff though, you dont judge on that, just on the initial action.

I'm not a referee but the fact that Rory's fair shoulder (and it was initially a fair shoulder) resulted in one player suffering a concussion means that it was dangerous play and therefore it was right that he was booked. What was wrong was that he was left on the pitch. A second concussion could have had tragic consequences.

PRAF

premierstone wrote: »

When has anyone ever had their had broken in an instance like you have described?

Have a read of this thread and you'll get a feel for it

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056794019

PRAF

mordeith wrote: »

I'm not sure where you played hurling but from the age of 12 we were told to put the hurley up either behind your hand it you were going up to catch a ball. Anyone who sticks their hand up witouth protecting it is bound to come out of it a few broken fingers (as well as a lesson learned).

Dublin

You are right to a degree. However, you can only really protect yourself to a certain extent. If someone is intent on 'doing you' they can almost certainly do it. In many cases it can be done within the boundaries of the rules

I would have thought most hurlers have sufferred a few broken bones over the years. I broke my hand twice playing and I also broke a few opponents over the years as well. Nothing dirty (at least not on my part)

premierstone

PRAF wrote: »

Have a read of this thread and you'll get a feel for it

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056794019

I see no post there mentioning anything about someone having their hand broken and infact nearly every post is correctly pointing out it is a skill and perfectly legal.

Anyone that gets there hand broken in that suituation has only themselves to blame it is their responsibility to protect their own hand.

eyescreamcone

PRAF wrote: »

Out of interest why did you say senior football? Should the same rules not apply to all the grades?

Listen, in no way am I saying that we should take the physicality out of the game. I personally hate the nancy boy antics that go on in soccer. Pathetic to see grown men writhe around in mock agony when someone nudges them. For the most part, the GAA has got the balance right.

However, having played the game for 20 odd years I know that there are some limitations in the rule book which can be exploited. Hell, I've done it myself more than once. The shoulder challenge is fine 99% of the time but there are some instances where I do think it should be deemed a foul or a yellow. In hurling, one of the worst examples is the overhead pull where some players use it as free reign to try to break their opponents hand (although this is one I never engaged in myself).

I am in favour of refs being able to use common sense to determine if someone has overstepped the rules and used excessive force or deliberately / recklessly endangered an opponent.

Very easy to start throwing mud at other sports such as soccer.

Gaelic games are far from perfect
-There is plenty of diving in both gaelic football and hurling.
-There are plenty of unseemly antics in GAA games
eg. guys digging each other after one of them scores/comes on as sub etc etc

Sort out the GAAs problems before you slag off other sports.
(or open a thread)

PRAF

premierstone wrote: »

I see no post there mentioning anything about someone having their hand broken and infact nearly every post is correctly pointing out it is a skill and perfectly legal.

Anyone that gets there hand broken in that suituation has only themselves to blame it is their responsibility to protect their own hand.

Maybe that link didn't work for you? I've included a few quotes below.

"the follow through should never be down onto the opposing player (which is where the problems occur)"

"everyone is thought to keep their eye on the ball when pulling and you won't forget to put your hurley up with your hand a second time (as I look down at my crocked fingers )"

"In recent years it's lead to a load of lads with broken fingers etc"

"In any matches I was playing in the refs, by and large, seem to be good at reading whether a fella genuinely was pulling on the ball or had the full intention of following through to do some damage"

"its the best lads who can inflict the damage while connecting with the ball,thats the real talent.nothing like seeing the opposing player look down at his hand when the ball has been cleared"

"No one pulling. Not even a hurley up for protection. Big change from a few years back, where they'd take your hand off, if you did that"

"It's the dirty strokes like lads not going for the ball and just taking a fellas head and hand out of it that ruin it"

premierstone

I asked you for specific examples not some random internet quotes, if a player protects himself with the hurl infront of the catching hand no overhead pull can inflict damage no matter what the intention of the player making the overhead pull.

dzer2

premierstone wrote: »

I asked you for specific examples not some random internet quotes, if a player protects himself with the hurl infront of the catching hand no overhead pull can inflict damage no matter what the intention of the player making the overhead pull.

Wrong here mate if the player behinds pulls on the hand holding the hurley he will inflict damage. Want an example look at what parlon did to tj back in June.

12gauge dave

Gaelic boys always dissing soccer you can not compare gaelic to soccer. I have huge admiration for gaelic footballers but soccer is on a different level skill and ability wise

premierstone

dzer2 wrote: »

Wrong here mate if the player behinds pulls on the hand holding the hurley he will inflict damage

Thats not an overhead pull, its batting on the ball, which I agree is very dangerous when mistimed or done with the intention of inflicting damage.

dzer2

premierstone wrote: »

Thats not an overhead pull, its batting on the ball, which I agree is very dangerous when mistimed or done with the intention of inflicting damage.

I have had an overhead pull or double as it used to be called hit me on the chin it was that late:D:D Chap didnt mean it but he split me wide open.

aveytare

12gauge dave wrote: »

Gaelic boys always dissing soccer you can not compare gaelic to soccer. I have huge admiration for gaelic footballers but soccer is on a different level skill and ability wise

Eh, soccer's played worldwide though. The Irish soccer team isn't exactly skillful, sadly.

12gauge dave

aveytare wrote: »

Eh, soccer's played worldwide though. The Irish soccer team isn't exactly skillful, sadly.

Ya its impossible to compare. Id love to see the irish international soccer team play the gaelic all star football team in a gaa match and then play them in a soccer match to see which group of athletes can adjust to the other sport better

jack presley

PRAF wrote: »

Out of interest why did you say senior football? Should the same rules not apply to all the grades?

The reason I specified senior football was because that's probably the only real level when the scenario you outlined could happen. I know you get the odd freak but at U12, U14 etc. most players would be around the same size so you don't get guys 'twice the size' knocking out teeth using their shoulders.

harpsman

PRAF wrote: »

Funnily enough, I think the GAA will soon need to do something about the so called 'hard but fair' challenges. The problem with those is that when the players get bigger with better training / nutrition / etc, the impacts of those challenges increases and so does the risk of serious injury.

Players shouldn't be allowed go into those challenges in a reckless fashion. A shoulder should be about knocking someone off their stride, bumping them over the sideline, etc. It shouldn't be about trying to absolutely pulverise them. Now you can't and shouldn't ever take the physicality out of the GAA. However, I'd actually agree with the yellow that Rory O'Carroll got on Sunday.

Reminds me of something i said after mchugh incident in ulster final- if an increasing number of players start to get injured from shoulders from big men is it worth looking at? Mchugh had concussion,torn quad and perforated ear drum. However any discussion was shouted down with accusations of mind games etc. or the nonsensical "he was going for ball".
Ironic to hear mayo complaining about orher teams being cynical-in last years all ireland semi and final in particular they took cynicism to new levels.

yop

harpsman wrote: »

Reminds me of something i said after mchugh incident in ulster final- if an increasing number of players start to get injured from shoulders from big men is it worth looking at? Mchugh had concussion,torn quad and perforated ear drum. However any discussion was shouted down with accusations of mind games etc. or the nonsensical "he was going for ball".
Ironic to hear mayo complaining about orher teams being cynical-in last years all ireland semi and final in particular they took cynicism to new levels.

Any Mayo fan will not hide from the fact that we were cynical in the closing stages of the semi final, so don't know where you are getting that from.

Slattsy

yop wrote: »

Any Mayo fan will not hide from the fact that we were cynical in the closing stages of the semi final, so don't know where you are getting that from.

Mayo fans will, and have. The last 20 mins of that game was shocking. (but you gotta do what you gotta do)

But the rest of the country seem to be conveniently oblivious to this. Or just blinded by.....

I dont remember a thread starting about it though. Wonder why :rolleyes:

yop

Slattsy wrote: »

Mayo fans will, and have. The last 20 mins of that game was shocking. (but you gotta do what you gotta do)

But the rest of the country seem to be conveniently oblivious to this. Or just blinded by.....

I dont remember a thread starting about it though. Wonder why :rolleyes:

And the last 10 minutes of last Sundays game was just as cynical.

premierstone

Slattsy wrote: »

Mayo fans will, and have. The last 20 mins of that game was shocking. (but you gotta do what you gotta do)

But the rest of the country seem to be conveniently oblivious to this. Or just blinded by.....

I dont remember a thread starting about it though. Wonder why :rolleyes:

I'll tell you why, because James Horan never said his team would never do such a terrible thing and he also never canme out after the Donegal defeat with a false claim that the referee was biased, as they say in the legal profession Gavin opened the door here

Slattsy

yop wrote: »

And the last 10 minutes of last Sundays game was just as cynical.

Never said it wasnt. Read my point again.

premierstone wrote: »

I'll tell you why, because James Horan never said his team would never do such a terrible thing and he also never canme out after the Donegal defeat with a false claim that the referee was biased, as they say in the legal profession Gavin opened the door here

Bull. And you know it.

yop

Slattsy wrote: »

Never said it wasnt. Read my point again.

Bull. And you know it.

And Mayo fans didn't say it wasn't either. Plenty of fans from Donegal, Dublin and Mayo will say their teams weren't cynical and on the flip plenty will say they were.
As was the last 10 minutes of the game last Sunday was just as "shocking" so Dublin can't take the high horse on this either, yet the manager said he would walk away.. he hasn't walked away though has he???

Your trying to slate Mayo for something that Dublin did last Sunday, while proclaiming that Mayo fans are saying we aren't. As I said plenty of Mayo fans on here saying we were cynical, so your point is kinda dead in the water.

premierstone

Slattsy wrote: »

Bull. And you know it.

What?? You asked why there wasn't a thread opened last year slating Mayo for been cynical. Well firstly there wasn't one opened this year about Dublin either so I'm not sure what your point was and secondly if you were refering to this thread, it was not opened to talk about Dublins cynical play in the closing stages, it was opened as a result of Jim Gavin coming out with a complete off the wall, although out of character, load of waffle about Dublin having bet both Mayo and the referee.

On a side note GAA players who were unhappy a number of years ago with how they were been treated and used as pawns established the GPA which is in effect a players union, I think if I was an inter-county referee I would be looking strongly into establishing something similar for referees. Jim Gavin -and many before him- should not be allowed, on national television no less, to question Joe McQuillan's integrity like that, its slander.