Replay: All Ireland SFC Final Dublin v Kerry Saturday 14/09/2019 @ 6pm

blanch152

Hammer Archer wrote: »

Advantage doesn't mean that you can commit a foul, technical or otherwise. If a player is fouled but can continue, the referee plays advantage. If, while that advantage is still being played, the player overcarries (or indeed commits any other foul), the referee should call the play back and award the free for the initial foul. Just like in rugby where a player can't simply chuck the ball forward because the referee is playing advantage.

I am not disagreeing that he took the steps.

All I am pointing out is that the incident was in keeping with how Lane reffed the rest of the game. In the first half, Dublin should have had a penalty for a foul on O'Callaghan, a free for another foul on him and another free for a foul on Kilkenny. All were pretty straight-forward for me but Lane let the game flow.

Dublin didn't get a single free inside the Kerry 45, not even sure if they got a free in the Kerry half. An awful lot was let go, so singling out the Murchan goal paints an untrue picture of the game. If Lane had blown it up, he would rightly be accused of gross inconsistency.

The first thing you ask of a referee is consistency, and he was certainly consistent in letting a lot go. Did that make for a better game? Quite possibly. While there was a lot of off-the-ball blocking and checking, that is hard to police at the best of times, but there was a huge total from play. There was also very little playacting. Apart from one Kerry player going down holding his head when the tackle was elsewhere, nobody was trying to systematically fool the ref.

Hammer Archer

ArielAtom wrote: »

Hammer, while you are technically correct it rarely is punished. Yes he overcarried, but if we analysed every carry by every player on Saturday it would probably be 50% of them.

That is true. But while you'd expect 6 - 8 steps to be let go, Murchan did take a huge number of steps to be fair. He traveled from the edge of the D to the 13m line (20 metres) after his final hop. I've seen "12 steps" being mentioned as well but haven't counted. If a player was to take that many steps when he wasn't at full tilt, you'd expect him to be called up on it.

Regardless, the goal stood and the number of steps taken shouldn't take away from the fact that it was a phenomenal run and an even better finish with the outside of the boot, completely wrong footing the keeper.

yobr

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Pretty lame euphemism for a player who is frequently just a dirty player tbh.

Do you really think that a guy "who is frequently just a dirty player" would have lasted this long in what is probably the most competitive senior GAA squad in the country?

The_Kew_Tour

It was 9 max with 5 to 6 when jersey was being pulled on him.

He did foul, but was also fouled. I think the advantage within reason stood to to attacker.

I see both sides of argument here, but this whole he took x amount of steps is bit too simplistic, although that was only from post while back

FrancieBrady

yobr wrote: »

Do you really think that a guy "who is frequently just a dirty player" would have lasted this long in what is probably the most competitive senior GAA squad in the country?

Yeh, if he gets a job done.

Strumms

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

It was 9 max with 5 to 6 when jersey was being pulled on him.

He did foul, but was also fouled. I think the advantage within reason stood to to attacker.

I see both sides of argument here, but this whole he took x amount of steps is bit too simplistic, although that was only from post while back

Steps is a very important discussion, questions need to be asked, such as how many steps did he take on the way up to collect Sam ? :eek:;)

C__MC

The goal will stand and will be a part GAA folklore for many moons no matter how much we debate it

sk9

Steps excuse has me yawning. It is never called up, you'd swear that some of you were watching your first game of football. Kerry goal last week was minimum 6 steps.

If Lane was in the mood to blow for the foul on Murchan, he would have blew for the penalty for Con in the first half, and Moran goes on a black card. Wouldn't have changed the game.

Bonniedog

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Pretty lame euphemism forback in noughtie a player who is frequently just a dirty player tbh.

Any inter county team with ambitions is going to have lads who have a bit of badness in them. Kerry were not behind the door in that respect, and young David is no shrinking violet!

Your own county had some charming young men over the years too

Poor_old_gill

sk9 wrote: »

Steps excuse has me yawning. It is never called up, you'd swear that some of you were watching your first game of football. Kerry goal last week was minimum 6 steps.

If Lane was in the mood to blow for the foul on Murchan, he would have blew for the penalty for Con in the first half, and Moran goes on a black card. Wouldn't have changed the game.

Just to correct you here - it wouldnt have been a black card as he didnt pull the player to the ground.
Same with the O Callaghan foul in the first half - people afterwards were saying it should have been a black but it wasnt as the puller wasnt pulled to the ground

Poor_old_gill

Bonniedog wrote: »

Any inter county team with ambitions is going to have lads who have a bit of badness in them. Kerry were not behind the door in that respect, and young David is no shrinking violet!

Your own county had some charming young men over the years too

You seem to be on a one man crusade to build this inaccurate picture of Clifford as being dirty - it's quite entertaining to watch.

FrancieBrady

Bonniedog wrote: »

Any inter county team with ambitions is going to have lads who have a bit of badness in them. Kerry were not behind the door in that respect, and young David is no shrinking violet!

Your own county had some charming young men over the years too

And I wouldn't be on here calling them 'gentlemen' either.

robbiezero

sk9 wrote: »

Steps excuse has me yawning. It is never called up, you'd swear that some of you were watching your first game of football. Kerry goal last week was minimum 6 steps.

If Lane was in the mood to blow for the foul on Murchan, he would have blew for the penalty for Con in the first half, and Moran goes on a black card. Wouldn't have changed the game.

Nobody is making excuses or arguing that had it been blown that the result would have been different, its just a discussion of aspects of the game, no need to be defensive about it.
I remember a similar incident that had quite a big impact on the game in 2009 hurling final where Richie Power was followed and over-carried to win a penalty.

Bonniedog

Poor_old_gill wrote: »

You seem to be on a one man crusade to build this inaccurate picture of Clifford as being dirty - it's quite entertaining to watch.

I don't believe I mentioned him in that respect?

Wasn't claiming he is dirty, but that he is no different to other top players in that he can give as good as he gets. And probably has needed to since he was a young fella,

Only recent players I can honestly say I never saw engaged in such have been Bernard Brogan and the Gooch, And both have been well protected, but also seemed to have the sort of personalities to basically ignore anyone trying to get into their face. And of course usually did their talking on the scoreboard.

yobr

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yeh, if he gets a job done.

But how could he get a job done “if he was just a dirty player” surely to be part of a team that has won multiple league and championships, you need multiple attributes as a player?

ps. I know the answer here....

FrancieBrady

yobr wrote: »

But how could he get a job done “if he was just a dirty player” surely to be part of a team that has won multiple league and championships, you need multiple attributes as a player?

ps. I know the answer here....

Here is what I said:

If he can't win by fair means he will resort to unfair ones. Fact of life with Johnny I'm afraid.

...and Copper is well known for it around the counties that have played Dublin.

Name as many other players as you wish, it won't change that, sadly.

yobr

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Here is what I said:



...and Copper is well known for it around the counties that have played Dublin.

Name as many other players as you wish, it won't change that, sadly.

I always find with you Francie that when you stop answering the direct questions that your argument has disappeared. Anyway its matters not, i’m off to watch Saturday’s match again, you keep trolling away. Night now.

FrancieBrady

yobr wrote: »

I always find with you Francie that when you stop answering the direct questions that your argument has disappeared. Anyway its matters not, i’m off to watch Saturday’s match again, you keep trolling away. Night now.

When somebody uses the word 'frequently' in future, maybe don't ignore it to make up something to have a moan about.

sk9

robbiezero wrote: »

Nobody is making excuses or arguing that had it been blown that the result would have been different, its just a discussion of aspects of the game, no need to be defensive about it.
I remember a similar incident that had quite a big impact on the game in 2009 hurling final where Richie Power was followed and over-carried to win a penalty.

Not defensive mate no doubt it was steps. Some people on here just seem determined to put an asterisk beside this Dublin team with microanalysis

yobr

FrancieBrady wrote: »

When somebody uses the word 'frequently' in future, maybe don't ignore it to make up something to have a moan about.

I’ve nothing to moan about as a Dublin supporter i’m having the time of my life.

rm75

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Pretty lame euphemism for a player who is frequently just a dirty player tbh.

Meh you dont become a top defender by being a choir boy.

Coopers no different than Paudi O'Se, sure opposition will dislike him while his own love him. His medals speak for themselves.

FrancieBrady

yobr wrote: »

I’ve nothing to moan about as a Dublin supporter i’m having the time of my life.

Well, you have spent plenty of time trying to deflect from the point. And all you guys seem able to counter with is, 'sure yer man over there is as bad'. :rolleyes:

Enjoy the win, but don't be inventing myths.

JRant

Ah, in fairness, they were only little steps

rm75

robbiezero wrote: »

Nobody is making excuses or arguing that had it been blown that the result would have been different, its just a discussion of aspects of the game, no need to be defensive about it.
I remember a similar incident that had quite a big impact on the game in 2009 hurling final where Richie Power was followed and over-carried to win a penalty.

Refs are human , even the best will make mistakes, its part of the game and you have to deal with it. Con coulda had a penno also but hey these things usually even out. Ref made no difference yesterday, you could argue he let too much go but it made for a fantastic 1st half particularly.

Bonniedog

Once Lane set out his stall the players responded. Both sides could have complaints about decisions but he was more or less consistent.

Not sure what the free count actually was, but must nearly have been lower than the hurling final which in itself would be pretty rare if not unique. I remember doing stats on a game 6/7 years ago and there were nearly 50 stoppages apart from kick outs and line balls, Those days are gone thankfully.

Also helped that no-one was acting the bollix. I can't think of any player who went down other than for a legitimate reason. If the game is played in that spirit then ref can mostly leave the whistle in his pocket and let them get on with it.

JRant

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Well, you have spent plenty of time trying to deflect from the point. And all you guys seem able to counter with is, 'sure yer man over there is as bad'. :rolleyes:

Enjoy the win, but don't be inventing myths.

Myths?
Cooper got sent off the last day for niggly fouls. There wasn't a bad stroke in all his tackles and in all honesty while he does play on the line he is not a dirty player. He just does what every other intercounty defender does, only better, very similar to keagan.

Yet the one player who pulled on a lad trying to lift the ball, lead with the forearm into a defenders head and gave another lad a box is definitely not a "dirty" player, no siree.

PressRun

The constant debate over which team has the dirtiest players has to be one of the most boring and dumb conversations in gaelic football.

Dyr

Bonniedog wrote: »

Also helped that no-one was acting the bollix. I can't think of any player who went down other than for a legitimate reason.

Clifford.

Lane actually kept Kerry in the game in the first half, handed them scorable frees for borderline infringements. Different story at the other end.

awaywithyou

Ah jaysus lads the match is done and dusted..... Dublin won... it wasn’t decided by any one refereeing decision... Dublin were better... our Kerry boys will have learnt a lot....

Cooper I think is made out to be dirtier than what he actually is... people see him with this big serious face on him and think he’s a prick... he seems to piss people off like Paul Galvin used to years ago... I haven’t seen anyone stretchered off the field because of something he did so he obviously isn’t that dirty....

The steps thing the Gaa will have to look at... everyone is over carrying the ball these days in my view.. in both hurling and football... DJ Carey scored 30 championship goals in his time... he def overcarried for 90% of them...

Anyways like I said match is done & dusted... hopefully he experience will stand to our lads and the Dubs might b happy with there lot!!

lotmc

Interesting that we saw two very different styles of refereeing between the two games. Gough refereed the first game by the book, whilst the replay saw a lot more discretion being used by Lane.

Had Lane reffed the first game, I reckon Dublin would have won handily as Cooper would not have walked.

corny

Bambi wrote: »

Lane actually kept Kerry in the game in the first half, handed them scorable frees for borderline infringements. Different story at the other end.

Don't worry about that. Lets focus on Murchans steps.

13-4 was the free count at half time. Mostly disciplined tackling from both sides but the ref only intervened when Kerry had the ball. I'd love to know why?

Watch the sequence leading up to Fitzsimons ticking. Watch how O'Callaghan is man handled by O'Brien and how he touches Morley 60 seconds later. How one can be a free and the other is ignored is a mystery. Actually O'Shea was allowed grab McCaffreys arm in that sequence too. Free out was given!

Someone said he was consistent.....yeah he was consistent in being inconsistent.

FrancieBrady

Just for clarification: My definition of a 'dirty player' is not one who is robust or who occasionally fouls nor would he need to specifically injure someone.
A 'dirty player' is one who routinely chooses to foul when fair means fail him.
Cooper is not unique in that regard, and I only mentioned him when he was nominated as a 'gentleman'. He isn't on the field of play imo.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Just for clarification: My definition of a 'dirty player' is not one who is robust or who occasionally fouls nor would he need to specifically injure someone.
A 'dirty player' is one who routinely chooses to foul when fair means fail him.
Cooper is not unique in that regard, and I only mentioned him when he was nominated as a 'gentleman'. He isn't on the field of play imo.

Once again, a unique definition comes to your rescue.

You painted a picture of Cooper that was not universally shared and you are backtracking to say it meant something else.

mountgomery burns

threeball wrote: »

A shot clock is not the answer. Kerry went deep and zonal yesterday and it served them badly. They should have went man for man. That would have forced Dublin into longer kickouts, it wouldn't allow them to play pass the parcel across the 45 and would have prevented the spare man overlap which was always there due to their defensive tactics.

If teams want to stop clock management from another team then they need to employ tactics that prevent it. Many teams are trying to be far too clever now and have ignored the benefits of a more traditional approach where it's merited.

Don't agree with this at all to be honest with you. The perfect example being the goal, one instance when there is no argument that Kerry had a conventional setup for that play and Murchan tore down the middle of the defense unopposed.

I thought that was poor enough from Kerry but it would contradict your point about going man on man. As would there defensive frailities in previous games up until the final. Kerry's tactic of lumping the ball in early yielded no dividends and meant that they gave away a 4 points head start. They also conceded the goal, if neither of those had happened they would have been right there at the death.

No doubt the better team won the match, but Kerry did enough to keep themselves in it against the best team in the Country so I would be slow to criticize them tactically. Ultimately, over the course of 150 minutes of football class is going to win out. That's what happened on Sunday. Giving the Dubs more space by pushing up the field would have been kamikaze stuff. I don't think Kerry were overtly negative they just weren't naive.

Just on the shot clock thing, surprised people even responding to that. Absolute nonsense

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Once again, a unique definition comes to your rescue.

You painted a picture of Cooper that was not universally shared and you are backtracking to say it meant something else.

What?

I reacted to people calling him a gentleman. A dirty player - one who uses foul play far too often - is not a gentleman in my 'unique' definition of one.

I don't know if it is 'universally' shared or not, nor do I care much. I am sure enough of my own opinion not to be hiding in the herd.

TheCitizen

lotmc wrote: »

Interesting that we saw two very different styles of refereeing between the two games. Gough refereed the first game by the book, whilst the replay saw a lot more discretion being used by Lane.

Had Lane reffed the first game, I reckon Dublin would have won handily as Cooper would not have walked.

Why was Gough not reffing the replay? Is that normal that they would change a ref like that?

Gough reffed the first game to the letter of the law which is fine, that's what he's supposed to do. The criticism of him was completely wrong.

BonnieSituation

TheCitizen wrote: »

Why was Gough not reffing the replay? Is that normal that they would change a ref like that?

Yes it is.

See 2016 and the plethora of hurling replays the last decade.

beggars_bush

Snow Garden wrote: »

A ref will never count the steps where a player is being fouled.
It was a fabulous goal especially since it was straight from the throw in.

who was fouling him?
Moran put his hand in (the wrong one) and didn't get the ball.
where was the foul though.

overcarrying isn't negated by someone being fouled.

liogairmhordain

TheCitizen wrote: »

Why was Gough not reffing the replay? Is that normal that they would change a ref like that?

After controversies in the replays of the 1996 all-Ireland football final and 1998 munster hurling final, it was decided to change referees for replays from then on.
pat mceneaney (who had refereed both mayo-meath games in 1996) refereed the drawn 2000 final, but brian white took over for the replay.

Tomw86

beggars_bush wrote: »

who was fouling him?
Moran put his hand in (the wrong one) and didn't get the ball.
where was the foul though.

overcarrying isn't negated by someone being fouled.

Moran fouled him as you alluded to.

It was as much of a foul as the penalty in the first game. Without that penalty Dublin win.

crossman47

Tomw86 wrote: »

Moran fouled him as you alluded to.

It was as much of a foul as the penalty in the first game. Without that penalty Dublin win.

The penalty was saved!

rm75

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What?

I reacted to people calling him a gentleman. A dirty player - one who uses foul play far too often - is not a gentleman in my 'unique' definition of one.

I don't know if it is 'universally' shared or not, nor do I care much. I am sure enough of my own opinion not to be hiding in the herd.

There's no "gentlemen" playing sport at the highest level (at least on the field). You simply cant get to that level by being a gentleman.

The reaction to one sending off has been completely OTT. I'd view Cooper as relatively clean for a top level defender, there are certainly far worse than him out there. Not like he has a history of sendings off either.

As Tomas O'Se said, you need to be a bit of a "scumbag" and he meant it as a compliment despite people taking that comment out of context !

FrancieBrady

rm75 wrote: »

There's no "gentlemen" playing sport at the highest level (at least on the field). You simply cant get to that level by being a gentleman.

Well take that up with those calling him a 'gentleman' because i certainly wasn't.

rm75

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Well take that up with those calling him a 'gentleman' because i certainly wasn't.

Having witnessed him interact with kids he's a gentleman off the field anyway.

Tomw86

crossman47 wrote: »

The penalty was saved!

They got a point from the save though!

threeball

mountgomery burns wrote: »

threeball wrote: »

A shot clock is not the answer. Kerry went deep and zonal yesterday and it served them badly. They should have went man for man. That would have forced Dublin into longer kickouts, it wouldn't allow them to play pass the parcel across the 45 and would have prevented the spare man overlap which was always there due to their defensive tactics.

If teams want to stop clock management from another team then they need to employ tactics that prevent it. Many teams are trying to be far too clever now and have ignored the benefits of a more traditional approach where it's merited.

Don't agree with this at all to be honest with you. The perfect example being the goal, one instance when there is no argument that Kerry had a conventional setup for that play and Murchan tore down the middle of the defense unopposed.

I thought that was poor enough from Kerry but it would contradict your point about going man on man. As would there defensive frailities in previous games up until the final. Kerry's tactic of lumping the ball in early yielded no dividends and meant that they gave away a 4 points head start. They also conceded the goal, if neither of those had happened they would have been right there at the death.

No doubt the better team won the match, but Kerry did enough to keep themselves in it against the best team in the Country so I would be slow to criticize them tactically. Ultimately, over the course of 150 minutes of football class is going to win out. That's what happened on Sunday. Giving the Dubs more space by pushing up the field would have been kamikaze stuff. I don't think Kerry were overtly negative they just weren't naive.

Just on the shot clock thing, surprised people even responding to that. Absolute nonsense

The Murchan goal wasn't man on man as his marker was no where to be seen.

Edgware

sk9 wrote: »

Steps excuse has me yawning. It is never called up, you'd swear that some of you were watching your first game of football. Kerry goal last week was minimum 6 steps.

If Lane was in the mood to blow for the foul on Murchan, he would have blew for the penalty for Con in the first half, and Moran goes on a black card. Wouldn't have changed the game.

What goes around comes around. Over the years Kerry players have got away with fouling on and off the ball under the guise of "manly play". You win some you lose some

mountgomery burns

threeball wrote: »

The Murchan goal wasn't man on man as his marker was no where to be seen.

Is that meant to be a joke? He was behind him and ran into Fenton, had no chance of getting back then. How does one man getting beaten to the ball suddenly leave a player with 80 yards of space to run into?

All I can say is I find very hard to see how giving Dublin extra space to run into when they break through into Kerry's half would help keep them in a game with them. A recipe for disaster

threeball

mountgomery burns wrote: »

threeball wrote: »

The Murchan goal wasn't man on man as his marker was no where to be seen.

Is that meant to be a joke? He was behind him and ran into Fenton, had no chance of getting back then. How does one man getting beaten to the ball suddenly leave a player with 80 yards of space to run into?

All I can say is I find very hard to see how giving Dublin extra space to run into when they break through into Kerry's half would help keep them in a game with them. A recipe for disaster

He was miles off him before Murchan even got the ball. Then the full back and centre back went AWOL. An u10s team wouldn't have left the space down the middle that Kerry did on that play.

Bonniedog

The Murchan goal was one of the very few occasions Kerry had defensive lapses of the sort that were exploited by Tyrone, and Cork and Mayo in the league final

Defence improved hugely over the Summer. So could be a bit like Dublin in transition between 2009 hiding and competing seriously in 2010, and winning in 2011.

Be interesting to see what tactics they deploy next year. Seeming to tire might simply be a case of not being used to that intensity for two 80+ minute games.